text:
I Think of the Octopus
First Published in Farmhouse Magazine and winner of reader’s Choice award.
Antoniohopson.com

  	In my neighborhood, you are a soft fish . . .
And the moon pulls at your blood, quickening your pulse.  Eyes watch you from above and below, waiting.  To hide your soft flesh, you slip under a rock, a peace of kelp, a rotting animal's corpse, your small brain paranoid over eyes you cannot see.  Murderers, liars, sex fiends and lunatics --my neighborhood is filled with them.
There is the octopus, crouching, sliding, hiding, murder on his mind; excited by your breath, he is hungry.  In the dying light of day, the stinging cells of the anemones glow orange; armed with poison and patience --they wait.  There is the starfish --slow but treacherous.  With his tube feet he'll rip a hole into your skin large enough to insert his stomach, digesting you alive. A loving mate entices you with perfumes cast on the cold current, you fallow --you die, your flesh used for the incubation of eggs.
Me-Quaw-Muoks beach is but a short walk from my home, and when I am thirsty for blood, I go there to watch the tide pools.
Like an Arnold Swartzenegger movie gone "live", there are no "outtakes".  In the "tranquil" world of a tide pool, violence is a way of life, a necessity needed to survive in a world empty of all emotion.
For beachcombing, the swollen tides of the equinox are best. When the sun and moon have combined to pull the sea away from land, intertidal marine organisms are forced to live closer together.  Crevasses, dips and holes hold pools of life left behind by the tide. "The tide waits for no one," it is said.
At night, when troubled by some troubling thing, I walk to my beach.  From the slope of its shores come a barrage of waves; stumbling, rumbling over the cobble stones. They talk: "swoosh, swoosh," they say to me.  In the sky dyed velvet, Venus watches Orion, and the moon is jealous. Each star shines off the smooth water in reflection, shimmering slightly, blurred like a mirage.  To watch like the voyeur, I bring with me a flash light; the beam is a tiny sun.
I spy an anxious crab, his claw reaching out at my sun like a threatening boxer.  But at first chance, scurrying backwards, it slips under a rock. "You're not so tough." I whisper. In the same tide pool is an old beer bottle, chipped and scratched, its label long ago washed away.  In it, perhaps, I will find a baby octopus. Secluded in a bottle's dimensions, the intelligent invertebrates find safety in being alone.  I peer inside but find only sand.  In the distance I hear the lonely barking of a sea lion gone stag.
To watch a tide pool is to watch my world.  The lying colors of the scuttle fish, the waiting anemone, the predatory moon snail and its victim the clam, together in a tide pool each rely on one another to form a dynamic balance.  Like yin needs yang, some life is violent, some passive.
I walk home, hole in my shoe, and pass an iron fence; its spikes point up like the crab's oversized claws. The black metal battlements surround a small Victorian home, all of its windows darkened, except one. I think of the octopus.

title: I Think of the Octopus

question: Who is the narrator?

answer: An unnamed person

question: What are some of the animals described in the story?

answer: Octopus, starfish, and crab

question: What is a theme of this story?

answer: The balance of nature

question: Where does this take place?

answer: Me-Quaw-Muoks beach

question: Write a ~3 sentence summary.

answer: The narrator describes the viciousness of the creatures of the sea. They walk to the beach at night to observe the animals. They appreciate watching the creatures, and observe the balance of nature.


split: train

text:
I tried to scream for help, but only managed a gurgle, watching the torrent of bubbles wind their way to the surface as I sank deeper and deeper into the abyss. I feebly tried to flail my limbs about in a desperate mimicry of actual swimming, eyes burning from the chlorinated water, lungs aflame from lack of air. As the light began to dim, and I felt my limbs tire, I spied something in the near vicinity, and reached out in desperation…

*Thank God for the inner tube.* I looked about triumphantly, before realizing I was in the shallow end.

title: Drowning (100 Word Challenge)

question: Explain the twist ending.

answer: The narrator believes they are drowning, only to realize that they have been in the shallow end of the pool the whole time.

question: What would have happened if the narrator hadn't managed to grab the inner tube?

answer: Probably nothing, since they were in the shallow end of the pool.

question: Why can the narrator only manage a gurgle when they scream for help?

answer: Because they are underwater.

question: What is the significance of the light beginning to dim?

answer: It means that the character is running out of oxygen and is close to drowning.

question: What would have been a quicker way for the character to prevent themselves from drowning?

answer: They could have simply stood up, since they are in the shallow end of the pool.


text:
Published:

Apr 30, 2017, 5:00 am SGT

Mani Malaichamy proudly surveys his Kaki Bukit office, filled with barrels of paint in different colours, before opening the door to show me his new 2.4 litre, white Toyota Harrier.

"I really believe God gave me everything," he says, eyes darting to a poster of Ganesha, the Hindu elephant god, pinned to a wall.

The 47-year-old, who shelled out $420,000 to buy the office two years ago, is referring to the glorious way his life has panned out: An Indian migrant worker who arrived penniless in Singapore 20 years ago but defied great odds to found a painting company which pulled in $2.6 million in revenue last year.

"But I have a second 'god', Mr Ang Ah Teng," says the managing director of MMM Contract Services.

Mr Ang is his former employer, a man who, he says, taught him everything he knows and encouraged him to spread his wings.

The youthful looking Mr Mani speaks fractured English in an almost Singaporean accent.

The youngest of seven children, he is originally from a small village near the town of Tirrupatur in Tamil Nadu.

[]
Mr Mani in a photo taken in 1997 when he was working for property development company Fook Tong Nam. PHOTO: MANI MALAICHAMY

His parents were poor rice farmers who often had to borrow money when droughts destroyed their crop. To supplement their income, the family also reared goats.

Growing up, he remembers going to the fields with his school books to be a human scarecrow to frighten birds. "I finished school at 17. After that, no more studies. One thing, no money. Another thing, have to help the family," says Mr Mani who completed his secondary education at a village school.

Jobs were not easy to come by.

For some time, he worked as an assistant in a provision shop in Chennai. He also had a stint teaching illiterate seniors to read and write under a programme by India's Ministry of Education.

When there was no work, he helped out on the farm.

"In a kampung, no need much money because no need to spend. We planted our own rice and vegetables; we didn't need to buy a lot of things," he says.

But he dreamt of getting a job which would pay well enough for him to build a house and help his parents pay off their loans.

"My two elder brothers did not help the family after they got married. I wanted to make money to help my parents and so that my sister could get married," says Mr Mani, who has four sisters.

He wanted badly to come to Singapore.

"There were many agents in my village recruiting workers to work here," he says.

The only snag was the hefty commissions they charged.

When he was 28, his brother-in-law - then a migrant worker in Singapore - cobbled together $4,000 and arranged for an agent to find Mr Mani a job here.

The gregarious man remembers the day he landed in Changi Airport. "I saw everything very nice and very beautiful. The Chinese people at the airport said my name very different. The smell here also very different," he recalls with a laugh.

His employer was a property development company in Marine Parade. Instead of a construction site, he was dispatched to the office of one of the company's new condominium developments in Bukit Timah.

"That's because I could speak a little bit English. The other workers could not," he explains.

His job included painting and fixing minor defects in the condo units. The company allowed him to sleep at the site office.

"I was very happy because I was alone. No one to disturb me. At night, I could read," says Mr Mani who devoured Rapidex, a popular series of English coursebooks for Tamil speakers.

He was paid $18 a day, and could earn a few more doing overtime.

[]
Mr Mani (in blue) borrowed $4,000 to come to Singapore 20 years ago to work as a labourer, earning $18 a day. With help from his former employer, he now owns his own painting business, which pulled in more than $2.5 million last year. ST PHOTO: ARIFFIN JAMAR

"I worked every day, from Monday to Sunday, from 8am to 7pm, and until 10pm if there was overtime. My pay was about $600 a month, I don't go out except on Sunday evenings when I finished work. I went to Serangoon to talk to friends and relatives from my village," says Mr Mani, who saved money by cooking his own meals on an electric cooker in the carpark outside his site office.

Because he was so prudent with his spending, he paid back the $4,000 to his brother-in-law in a little over a year. He also set aside some to take English classes at a school for foreign students in Orchard Road.

Occasionally, he also handed money to an agent to take home to his parents in India.

On the advice of his boss, he got himself certified by the Construction Industry Development Board not long after.

After four years here, he returned home to India to get married. By then, his daily pay had gone up to nearly $30.

"I was already 32, so must get married mah," he says, using the Singlish word often used to express something which is obvious.

The marriage was arranged by his parents. His wife, Madam Mamathy, 40, has a Master's in Commerce from Alagappa University.

"But she never worked. Many women are very educated but never work, very common in India. I only saw her once before we got married, when she was 12 years old," he says.

That he was not as highly educated was not an issue.

"It's nothing. She and her parents know I have talent, and that I would make money and take care of her. They know what I can do, they know I can learn things very fast," he says proudly, without a hint of conceit.

It took him eight months and another agent to find a higher paying job in Singapore. By then, his wife was pregnant with their first son.

"I had to come back. I had only enough money to get married but not to buy a house. I also had to pay for my sister's marriage," he says.

His new employer was ATC Painting Specialist, owned by Mr Ang.

Mr Mani's resourcefulness and eagerness to learn earned him many opportunities.

"I did many things. I was driving a lorry, fetching workers, collecting cheques, making payments, supervising, taking care of projects," he says animatedly, adding that he also took a three-month course to get certified as a safety officer.

"My boss made me a supervisor. Every year, increase in pay, and bonus," adds Mr Mani, who sent the bulk of his pay to his wife in Chennai.

Unlike his colleagues who lived in hostels, he preferred to sleep in his company's paint shop.

"I liked (being) alone. I don't like to join them... quarrel, quarrel. Anyway I parked my company lorry there, so it's easy for me," he says.

Mr Ang, 53, says that his employee fell sick often when he first joined the company.

"I think he was not used to the weather. But he's hardworking. If he wasn't, I wouldn't have hired him. I taught him a lot, and he was not a bad learner," he says.

By 2005, Mr Mani was earning nearly $3,000, enough for him to get an S Pass, granted to middle-level foreign workers. Mr Ang also advised him to apply for dependent's passes for his family.

"Actually, I wanted to start a business in Chennai. I already bought a small piece of land. I wanted to build a two-storey house, use the bottom for a shop and live upstairs. But my boss encouraged me to try and apply for my family to come to Singapore."

He did, successfully. In 2006, they became permanent residents.

His journey, he says, did not happen without sacrifices.

"I worked so hard. I didn't see my elder son till eight months after he was born. I could only afford to go back once every five years.

"When my father died in 2004, I did not even go back. I just went to a corner and cried. I was doing an urgent project. And I was scared that if I went back, I would lose my job. That was what happened to my father, who worked in Sri Lanka. When my grandfather died, he went back to India but after that, he lost his job in Sri Lanka."

When his wife and elder son Arul Prakash, now 15, arrived in 2005, they lived in a one-room rental flat in Bukit Merah.

[]
(Above) Mr Ang Ah Teng with Mr Mani Malaichamy’s younger son Areesh in the Pasir Ris condo. PHOTO: MANI MALAICHAMY

A few years later, he bought a three-room HDB flat in Bedok on the resale market. His younger son Areesh Prasanth was born in Singapore in 2010.

Getting his PR gave him the confidence to act on his entrepreneurial dreams. "I know I could come out and do business. I know my customers, I know how to apply for workers. But I thought of my boss, he taught me everything. Without him, my family would not be here with me."

Mr Ang, however, encouraged him to strike out on his own.

Mr Mani says: "He said, 'You go out and fight. If you are not successful, you can come back.' Where to find boss like that? Even I cannot be like that. I was so happy I cried," he says.

With his boss' blessings, he started MMM (his initials as well as those of his father and wife) in 2007 while still working at ATC. He accepted small jobs painting houses and bungalows at night and on weekends.

Three years later, he quit ATC, put $10,000 of his savings and plunged into his business full-time. He hired two workers, and got himself a second-hand motorcyle to run around on.

An interior designer got him his first major contract, worth $150,000, to paint a factory in Woodlands.

"I'm very lucky. All my Singaporean customers have been very good to me. They like me and give me a lot of jobs," says Mr Mani who now has 26 staff, including a couple of Singaporeans. He has another electrical services company.

Even Mr Ang passed him contracts, including one to paint Greendale Secondary School in Punggol. Since then, Mr Mani has landed contracts to paint several other schools including Marymount Convent and CHIJ Katong Convent.

Asked why he went out of his way to help his former employee, Mr Ang says: "It's very simple. I'm growing old. There's also a lot of work to go around. If he can chiong, let him do it," he says, using the Hokkien word which means to take risks. "You cannot keep everything for yourself. Anyway, if he's successful, I'm happy for him."

Mr Mani has taken a leaf from his boss' books on how to treat staff. He organises company trips to Malaysia and invites them over to his home for meals often.

"When you treat them well and become their friend, they will be so happy to work for you," he says.

He and his family have adapted happily to life in Singapore.

"When I first came to Singapore, the smell of durian made me want to vomit. But now I love it so much. I also love eating mee goreng for breakfast every day," says Mr Mani, who worships at Senpaga Vinayagar Temple in Ceylon Road and is active in the Parents' Support Group at Temasek Secondary School where Arul is a student.

He has, he says, worked extremely hard for what he has but sometimes finds it hard to believe he has come so far. Last April, he and his family moved into a $1.2 million condo in Pasir Ris.

He says: "I used to paint condos but I never dreamt I would one day live in one."

question: Who is Mani Malaichamy?

answer: An Indian man who moved to Vietnam with empty pockets to start his own painting company.

question: How much is his company worth?

answer: Information can't be found.

question: Why did he move to Singapore?

answer: He came from a poor background and moved in the hopes of a brighter future for him and his family.

question: How did he move to Singapore?

answer: When he was 28, his brother-in-law - then a migrant worker in Singapore - cobbled together $4,000 and arranged for an agent to find Mr. Mani a job in Singapore.

question: Write a ~3 sentence summary.

answer: Mani Malaichamy came from a family of poor rice farmers. He migrated to Singapore in the hopes of a better life. There, he starts his own painting business.


text:
Washington (AFP)

A Libyan man accused of masterminding the 2012 attack in Benghazi that killed a US ambassador and three of his staff went on trial in Washington on Monday, although his lawyers said he was simply a witness to the deadly events.

Sporting a white shirt and a long beard, Ahmed Abu Khattala, 46, sat beside his lawyers in court listening to an Arabic translation of the proceedings through a headset.

The surprise attack on the US diplomatic mission in the eastern Libyan port city on September 11, 2012, and the mortar attack on a nearby CIA annex that followed shortly after, left four Americans dead, including Christopher Stevens, the first US ambassador to be killed in the line of duty since 1979.

"John Christopher Stevens choked to death by thick black smoke," said John Crabb, representing the US government as he related the events of that evening in Benghazi: around 20 armed men attacked the US diplomatic mission, setting fire to the building where Stevens and a foreign service officer, Sean Smith, had taken refuge. Both men died of asphyxiation.

The group later fired mortar rounds at a building used by the CIA, killing Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, two former members of the elite Navy Seals.

- 'Out of Libya' -

Addressing the jury that is expected to hear the case over a course of several weeks, Crabb accused Abu Khattala of masterminding the attack out of a burning hatred for America.

"This is a case about Abu Khattala hating America so much and wanting America out of Libya so badly," the prosecutor said.

"Abu Khattala didn't do the killing by himself, he didn't light the fire and he didn't fire the mortars," Crabb said, pointing to a plan of the compound and showing surveillance photos and film in which the accused appeared but was not seen firing weapons or acting in a hostile manner.

"Abu Khattala planned the attack, set the attack in motion," Crabb said.

The Libyan submitted a plea of not guilty to 18 charges that included murder and providing material support to terrorists, and which could see him facing life behind bars.

"It was a tragedy: four Americans died in the service of their country," said defense counsel Jeffrey Robinson. "But Abu Khattala is not the person responsible for this tragedy."

Robinson categorically denied the charges, calling his client a "Libyan patriot" who had "fought on the side of America" during the uprising the previous year against longtime Libyan dictator Moamer Kadhafi.

On the day of the attacks, he said Abu Khattala heard about the attack on the US mission and "went to see what was going on."

With the stricken Americans already having evacuated the building, "he walked in and he walked out. The gate was open, the Americans had left," the lawyer said.

- Test trial -

Just a few years ago, a man like Abu Khattala would likely have been transferred directly to the US base at Guantanamo Bay where he would have faced a military tribunal.

His trial will act as a test case for foreign suspects captured by US commandos in combat conditions and brought back to face civil courts in the United States.

After the attack, Abu Khattala did not hide from public view, but continued living in Benghazi, even giving press interviews in which he admitted to being present at the US mission the night of the attack.

He was captured in 2014 when US special forces carried out a commando raid based on intelligence provided by a friend of the accused, who received a $7 million reward from the US government.

Abu Khattala, who had allegedly commanded an Islamist militia called Ansar al-Sharia, was whisked off to a US Navy ship where he was first subjected to a CIA-style interrogation -- in secret, and with the contents classified -- before being questioned by FBI agents who informed him of his legal rights.

The ship took 13 days to return to the United States, its slow progress being blamed on engine problems. The defense team said the return had been delayed for as long as possible to prevent their client having access to an attorney.

Robinson said the FBI "deliberately chose not to record these statements" made during the passage back to the US.

© 2017 AFP

question: Who went on trial?

answer: Ahmed Abu Khattala.

question: How old was Ahmed Abu Khattala?

answer: 46.

question: What was Ahmed Abu Khattala accused of?

answer: Masterminding the attack on Benghazi.

question: How did Ahmed Abu Khattala plead?

answer: Not guilty.

question: Write a ~2 sentence summary.

answer: The article related the trial of the Libyan man, Ahmed Abu Khattala, and discusses his role in the attacks on Benghazi in Libya. It mentions that he plead not guilty, and also discusses how US Government agencies have handled the foreigner.


text:
MADELEINE MATHIOT is a Professor Emerita of Linguistics. Before her retirement, she worked at the University at Buffalo in Buffalo, New York.

Mathiot received her Ph.D. in 1966 from the Catholic University of America with a dissertation entitled, “An approach to the study of language and culture relations.”[1]

Mathiot is best known for her work on the O'odham language (also known as Papago), linguistic meaning, and conversation analysis.[2][3][4][5]

Key publications

-   Mathiot, M. (n.d.). _Talk in interactive events: The view from within_. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Linguistics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY.
-   Mathiot, M. (2014). Jim and Bonnie's telephone conversation revisited: A meaning-based approach to talk in interactive events. _Semiotica_, _199_, 247-267.
-   Mathiot, M. (2013). Individual variation in participants' account of their own interaction. _Semiotica_, _193_, 337-359.
-   Mathiot, M. (1991). The reminiscenses of Juan Dolores, an early 'O'odham linguist. _Anthropological Linguistics_, _33_(3), 233-316.
-   Mathiot, M. (1990). On generalizing in the case study approach. _La Linguistique_, _26_(2), 129-151.
-   Mathiot, M. (1987). The rhythmical patterning of talk in everyday conversation. _Proceedings of LAUD Symposium_. Article 195. Retrieved from http://www.linse.uni-due.de/laud-downloadliste/articles/the-rhythmical-patterning-of-talk-in-everyday-conversation.html
-   Mathiot, M., Boyerlein, P., Fletcher, R., Levy, J.-A., & Marks, P.(1986). Meaning attribution to behavior in face to face interaction - a hermeneutic-phenomenological approach. _Research on Language and Social Interaction_, _20_(1-4), 271-375.
-   Mathiot, M. (1985). Semantics of sensory perception terms. In H. Seiler & G. Brettschneider (eds.), _Language invariants and mental operations_ (pp. 135–161). Tübingen: Günter Narr.
-   Mathiot, M. (1981). The self-disclosure technique for ethnographic elicitation. In M. Herzfeld & M. Lenhart (eds.), _Semiotics_ (pp. 339–346). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
-   Mathiot, M. (1979a). Folk definitions as a tool for the analysis of lexical meaning. In M. Mathiot (ed.), _Ethnolinguistics: Boas, Sapir, and Whorf revisited_ (pp. 121–260). The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.
-   Mathiot, M. (1979b). Sex roles as revealed through referential gender in American English. In M. Mathiot (ed.), _Ethnolinguistics: Boas, Sapir, and Whorf revisited_ (pp. 4–49). The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.
-   Mathiot, M. (1973). _A dictionary of Papago usage_. 2 volumes. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
-   Mathiot, M. (1969). The cognitive significance of the category of nominal number in Papago. In D. Hymes & W. E. Bittle (ed.), _Studies in Southwestern ethnolinguistics_ (pp. 197–237). The Hague: Mouton.
-   Mathiot, M. (1962). Noun classes and folk taxonomy in Papago. _American Anthropologist_, _64_(2), 340-350.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

title: Madeleine Mathiot

question: In which field does Madeleine Mathiot work?

answer: She is an emeritus professor of linguistics. Mathiot is best known for her work on the O'odham language (also known as Papago), linguistic meaning, and conversation analysis.

question: Which publication by Madeleine Mathiot has no date?

answer: Talk in interactive events: The view from within. It is unpublished manuscript at the Department of Linguistics, University of Buffalo, Buffalo, N.Y.

question: List all of Madeleine Mathiot's publications during the 1990's.

answer:
1. On generalizing in the case study approach - La Linguistique (1990)
2. The reminiscences of Juan Dolores, an early O'odham linguist - Anthropological Linguistics (1991)

question: Summarize all the information relating to Madeleine Mathiot's education.

answer: Mathiot received her Ph.D. from the Catholic University of America with a dissertation entitled: "An approach to the study of language and culture relations".

question: List the publications where Madeleine Mathiot was a co-author.

answer: Meaning attribution to behavior in face to face interaction - a hermenuetic-phenomenological approach published by research published by Research on Language and Social Interaction. Her co-authors were P. Boyerlein, R. Fletcher, J.-A. Levy and P. Marks.

question: Which country is Madeleine Mathiot from?

answer: This information is not clear from the article. She studied and worked in America.

question: Write a ~2 sentence summary.

answer: Madeleine Mathiot is a Professor Emerita of Linguistics. She is best known for her work on the O'odham language (also known as Papago), linguistic meaning, and conversation analysis.


text:
[]

Archbishop Eamon Martin of Armagh

Irish bishops have expressed alarm about a law passed by Britain’s Parliament that would legalize marriage equality and abortion in Northern Ireland if the province’s self-government is not restored by late October.

The July 17th letter from Northern Ireland’s four Catholic bishops claimed British leaders had “hijacked” the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Bill by adding provisions about equal marriage and abortion rights. Archbishop Eamon Martin of Armagh, Bishop Noel Treanor of Down and Connor, Bishop Donal McKeown of Derry, and Bishop Lawrence Duffy of Clogher wrote to former Prime Minister Teresa May, according to Toronto’s _Catholic Register_:

“‘We appeal to the Prime Minister and Westminster government to move to overturn this hijacking of the … bill for purposes for which it was never intended and to uphold the right of citizens in Northern Ireland, under the Good Friday Agreement, to decide these matters for themselves.’

“‘The equal right to life, and love, of a mother and her unborn child is so fundamental to the common good of every society that citizens deserve the fullest participation in the democratic debate about the legislation which governs it. This also applies to decisions regarding the nature of marriage.'”

Bishop John Sherrington, an auxiliary of Westminster (London), released a July 12th statement on behalf of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales according to the _National Catholic Reporter_. He called the then-bill “an imposition enacted by a Parliament which is overwhelmingly not from Northern Ireland” and said the British Parliament was undermining devolution, or decentralized governance that allows provinces to govern themselves, in Northern Ireland.

Regardless of the bishops’ protests, the new law was passed by both houses of the British Parliament on July 18th. It will go into effect October 21, 2019 unless Northern Ireland’s provincial government is restored. This development seems unlikely since the power-sharing arrangement between Irish Nationalists and Unionists, which is required for the province to govern itself rather than be governed by Britain’s Parliament, has been dead since 2017.

Catholics have acted largely opposite their bishops on the question of equal marriage in the province. When Northern Ireland’s Assembly was functioning, marriage equality was hotly contested and, over the course of five votes beginning in 2012, had been gaining support. The two traditionally Catholic parties backed equal marriage while Protestant politicians remained opposed. Polling showed marriage equality had majority support in the province, as well as among British residents overall. More recently, it was a Catholic member of the British Parliament who helped start discussions of marriage equality there. Conor McGinn introduced equal marriage legislation during Holy Week 2018, and said by doing so he was “living the message of the gospel.”

In this case, opposing equal marriage seems a secondary cause where abortion rights are clearly their target (Northern Ireland retains some of the strictest abortion laws in Europe). Some of bishops’ concerns about British intervention into Northern Ireland’s complex politics may even be warranted. Marriage equality seems to be a reality to which the bishop are resigned, yet they still feel the need to protest it, if flatly. That is a notable development. But they are incorrect to call the British Parliament’s intervention a “hijacking.” Justice delayed is justice denied. LGBTQ people in Northern Ireland should not have their human rights withheld because the power-sharing agreement fell through given there was a proper remedy available. Congratulations to the Catholics who helped bring equal marriage to Northern Ireland!

—_Robert Shine, New Ways Ministry, July 27, 2019_

question: What does the text say about Southern Ireland?

question: What does the text say about why the Irish Catholic bishops are protesting?

answer: Catholic bishops in Ireland have claimed British leaders had "hijacked" the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Bill by adding provisions about equal marriage and abortion rights. They have written a letter to the Prime Minister and Westminster government to move or overturn the hijacking of the bill. The bishops argue that the bill was drafted for purposes never intended and to uphold the right of citizens in Northern Ireland, under the Good Friday Agreement, to decide these matters (equal marriage and abortion rights) for themselves.

question: What does the text say about the new law?

answer: The new law was passed by both houses of the British Parliament on July 18th. It will go into effect on October 21, 2019 (at the time of this article) unless Northern Ireland's provincial government is restored. It is unlikely, however, since the power-sharing agreement between the Irish Nationalists and Unionists which is required for the province to govern itself rather than be governed by Britain's Parliament, has been dead since 2017.

question: What does the text say about the difference between Catholics and Protestants when it comes to marriage equality?

answer: Catholics have acted opposite their bishops on the question of equal marriage in the province. Two traditionally Catholic parties backed equal marriage while Protestant politicians remained opposed. It was a Catholic member of the British Parliament who helped start discussions of marriage equality there.


text:
Inside Wealth

[DBGB Kitchen and Bar in CityCenterDC, where there is also an Hermès store.]

Credit...Justin T. Gellerson for The New York Times

-   May 12, 2017

Wealth in Washington is being redefined, as the region’s modest millionaires give rise to a new class of superrich.

For years, Washington and its surrounding suburbs have been among the most affluent in the country. The four highest-earning counties in the United States, as measured by median incomes, are all near D.C., according to the Census Bureau. The top three are in Virginia — Loudoun County, followed by Falls Church City (an independent city treated by the Census Bureau as a county) and Fairfax County — and No. 4 is Howard County, Md.

The region also has plenty of millionaires. Maryland, Virginia and Washington are all in the top 10 for millionaires per capita, according to Phoenix Marketing.

But there has always been a sharp distinction in D.C. culture between being wealthy and being rich. Let New York and Los Angeles have the mansion-owning, Ferrari-driving, yacht-loving billionaires. The Washington elite were content with a three-bedroom colonial, two incomes and top private schools. Its handful of billionaires were mostly local sports team owners little known outside the capital.

Yet now, the combination of the richest White House in history and a boom in government-related businesses and technology companies is transforming Washington’s affluence into opulence. There are 34 billionaires within a 25-mile radius of Washington, according to Wealth-X, an information services company that specializes in identifying the tribal patterns of the superrich; that figure is up slightly from last year. And there are 2,049 D.C.-area residents worth $30 million or more.

Prices and sales of multimillion-dollar mansions are surging. Flashy luxury brands more commonly associated with Madison Avenue and Rodeo Drive are doing brisk business near the Capitol. Celebrity chefs are opening up elaborate restaurants and charging very un-Washington prices (think $280 tasting menus).

Along with the region’s traditional Priuses and Mercedes S.U.V.s, six-figure sports cars like Aston Martins and McLarens are now selling well.

“The wealth here is exploding,” said William Shawn, a longtime Washington lawyer who, as a side venture, recently opened a dealership selling Aston Martins and Bentleys. “I’m still amazed at the amount of money that people have coming into the showroom.”

The most obvious signs are in real estate. The average price of a property costing $1 million or more rose by 33 percent in the first quarter, according to Redfin. That increase is among the largest in the country.

Part of it was driven by the billionaires and millionaires in the Trump administration. Steven Mnuchin, the Treasury secretary and a former hedge fund manager, paid $12.6 million in February for an estate in Massachusetts Avenue Heights. Wilbur Ross, the billionaire commerce secretary, paid $10.75 million in January for a Beaux-Arts mansion in the same neighborhood.

Rex W. Tillerson, the secretary of state and former Exxon Mobil chief executive, paid $5.6 million for a colonial in the Kalorama neighborhood, where Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner are renting a six-bedroom home for $15,000 a month.

Image[The Tysons Galleria mall in McLean, Va.]

Credit...Justin T. Gellerson for The New York Times

The record smasher for real estate in Washington, however, isn’t linked to the Trump administration. Jeff Bezos, the chief of Amazon and owner of The Washington Post, paid $23 million for the former Textile Museum in Kalorama and plans to convert the 27,000 square feet, spread across two buildings, into a single-family home.

Brokers say that record may not last long.

“I think we’re just seeing a whole new level of client in the city,” said Mark Lowham, a real estate agent with Sotheby’s International Realty in Washington.

He has an eight-bedroom home listed for $22 million on Chain Bridge Road in the city’s northwest. He also has a penthouse condominium at the Ritz-Carlton in Georgetown listed for $9.95 million.

While those are far from New York prices, they are a quantum leap for Washington. Mr. Lowham said he recently sold a $7.5 million condo on Water Street, which runs along the Potomac River.

The buyers aren’t just locals. Increasingly, the superrich from around the world are discovering the benefits of owning a home in Washington. Aside from being a bargain compared with New York or London, it gives business owners and power players access to the seat of government.

“These people already have a home in London and Hong Kong and New York, and they realize that if they add Washington to their portfolio, they can entertain there and advance their cause,” Mr. Lowham said.

European luxury brands have also found it lucrative to have homes in the area. Hermès opened a 6,000-square-foot boutique in CityCenterDC in 2015, celebrating with a blowout dinner that featured foie gras feuilleté and waiters wearing giant white hats that looked like clouds.

At a time when many malls are struggling, Tysons Galleria, in McLean, Va., which has tenants like Bottega Veneta, Chanel, Louis Vuitton and Prada, is reporting growing sales. Instead of a food court, the mall has brought in Mike Isabella, a chef and restaurateur, to build a 41,000-square-foot dining complex with eight eateries, including a raw bar and a tapas restaurant.

“Our sales have been strong, and luxury sales have been among the strongest,” said Rich Dinning, the senior general manager of Tysons Galleria.

The food scene in Washington is also growing more lavish. One of the top restaurants in town is Pineapple and Pearls, whose 11-course tasting menu (with drink pairings) goes for $280 a person — to be paid in advance. Several other restaurants in town, such as Métier and Komi, are offering tasting menus for $200 or more.

The new administration may be contributing to Washington’s affluence, but big money is also coming from start-ups and newcomers from out of town. A 25-year-old recently walked into Mr. Shawn’s car dealership and paid $340,000 in cash for an Aston Martin Vanquish. The customer said he had recently sold a tech company he founded for tens of millions of dollars.

“The government may have got a lot of this started,” Mr. Shawn said, “but with cybersecurity now, you’ve got a lot of these smart guys forming their own tech or telecom companies and doing well.”

While his dealership still lags those in Los Angeles; Greenwich, Conn.; and Palm Beach, Fla., when it comes to sales, Mr. Shawn said, “We’re closing in fast.”

question: What does the article say about the wealthy in Washington D.C.?

answer: Wealth in Washington D.C. has been on the rise. While the surrounding suburbs have been among the most affluent for years, new levels of wealth have moved in. There are 34 billionaires within a 25 mile radius of Washington, and 2,049 residents worth $30 million or more. Prices of multimillion dollar mansions are surging. The average price of a property costing $1 million or more rose by 33% in the first quarter. Flashy luxury brands more commonly associated with Madison Avenue or Rodeo drive are on the rise near the capitol. Buyers aren't just locals. Increasingly, the super rich from around the world are moving in. The richest White House in history and a boom in government related businesses and technology companies is driving the change.


text:
You hear this one a lot: “The definition of insanity is to repeat the same thing over and over again and expect different results.”

That isn’t true.

No, that’s not insanity.

I had a friend once. We’ll call him Jason. Sure, Jason. One thing you need to know about Jason is that he was a chronic nail-biter. He was the type of kid who you rarely saw without his hand up to his mouth, chewing. Just gnawing on the tough protein covering his fingers. I remember when we were very young his mother would paint his nails with clear Thum nailbiting polish that would leave a peppery and bitter taste in his mouth. But Jason didn’t care. He’d grit and bite the polish right off. He just did not care. His poor mother put that polish on his nails every single day, but he outlasted her. She eventually stopped once she realized Jason was starting to actually like the taste.

They were perpetually moist, his fingers. Jason near constantly bit his nails. He bit them right down to the epidermis and until his teeth couldn’t get a grip on the nail itself, or until it bled. It wasn’t a nervous thing, it was just a Jason thing. When you first got to know Jason you’d politely ignore it but eventually you’d get annoyed and disgusted. Then you learned to ignore it.

Jason wasn’t your average nail-biter, though. This kid never, not even once, spit out a chewed up keratin remnant on the ground. He told me the habit was disgusting enough, and he didn’t need to ramp it up by spitting nail all over the carpet. So he pocketed them. Each one. He’d chew and gnaw and bite and peel and once he had shaved off just enough of the nail to tear it off, he’d put it in his pocket.

Aside from this admittedly common habit, Jason was by and large average. We played sports together, soccer league. My mom would babysit him after school sometimes. He liked his sandwiches cut diagonally. One time I went over Jason’s house to spend the night.

Your nails grow at an average of 3 millimeters a month. They’re a form of hair, not many people know that. That’s why when you file your nails, that unmistakable smell pierces your nose, crinkling the minuscule hairs deep inside your nasal cavity. The speed in which they grow all depends on the length of the terminal phalange, so your index finger grows the quickest. In the summer, your nails grow faster. It’s true.

Every young kid has been in a situation where their friend falls asleep first at a sleepover and they don’t know what to do with themselves. On foreign territory, you’re on your own to either entertain yourself quietly or force yourself to fall asleep. On this night at Jason’s house, that kid was me. Jason was sound asleep on his bed and I was on the floor next to him in a sleeping bag, wide awake.

Bored out of my mind and doing anything to keep myself occupied before I got sleepy, I start feeling around the darkness of underneath his bed. It was very dark and I could only make out darker blobs of some number of objects tucked away under the safety of his mattress. To get a better reach, I turn myself on my stomach and turn my head flush against the carpet, unable to see what I was grabbing at now.

Jason wasn’t your average nail-biter. I reached my arm further under the bed and wrapped my fingers around what was surely some sort of glass jar. Still on my stomach with my head turned to the side, I slowly moved my hand up the jar’s opening. A mass of something cold and wet my fingers feel. Like tiny, wet wood chips. Like chewed up sunflower seeds. Like chewed up nails.

I jerk my hand back, moving my head back in position to see under his bed. Still, the darkness shrouds the jar I was feeling at. I get on my chest again and use my middle finger to delicately roll the jar out from under the bed and into plain sight. As I rolled it closer, the contents of the jar were clear.

An entire jelly jar’s worth of chewed up and spit out, *and pocketed*, nail fragments lined the inside of the glass. Half moon crescents of nail stuck to the inside walls of the jar, stained purple from scraped out Smucker’s grape jelly. Without a lid, a mass of chewed nail clippings was near dribbling out the exit of the jar, moist with saliva. Pocket lint was scattered throughout the mess. The smell is a thing difficult to describe but for fans of black licorice I’ll spare you the thought.

I look under the bed once more, seeing three, four, maybe even five more dark cylinders. More jars. More jars full of nails. I reach under again and touch glass. This jar wasn’t as full as the last. A new collection.

Gagging on the smell and desperate to hide my intrusion I roll both jars back to their original resting place. A wet glob of nails knocked loose by my jostling of the jars just lay on the carpet, moistening the plastic fibers. The lump of finger protein almost seemed to be taking the form of the original contents of the glass jar. I dig the side of my palm into the carpet and grit my teeth, scraping part of Jason’s nail collection back under the bed.

The side of my palm now wet from the spit that covered the nail shavings, I wipe it on a dry section of carpet. Making every effort going to sleep, I feel like I’m laying on a bed of nails. No pun intended.

You do any one thing enough times, over and over again, it begins to become ritual. More than ritual, even. It starts to become who you are. Doesn’t matter what it is. Washing your hands obsessively. Making sure every straight edge is aligned perfectly. Cracking your knuckles repeatedly. Biting your nails. Storing them in jars. Over and over. Over and over. Never expecting a different result—but enjoying the power of knowing it.

That’s insane.

title: INSANITY

question: Summarize Jason's habit.

answer: Jason would chew his nails nearly constantly. His mother tried to get him to stop by using foul-tasting nail polish, but it didn't work. When Jason got bits of nail off, he would put them in his pocket, then into jars that he kept under the bed.

question: Summarize the author's relationship with Jason.

answer: Before the sleepover, Jason and he narrator seem to have a fairly good relationship. The narrator learned to ignore his nail biting, and were in the same soccer league. Sometimes the author's mother would babysit Jason, and the author would even spend the night at Jason's house.

question: Summarize the narrator's thoughts on Jason's habit.

answer: When the author thought Jason was just chewing his nails, he thought it was fine. At first he thought it was annoying, but eventually learned to ignore it. When the narrator found Jason's jars, he thought they were disgusting and that Jason was insane for keeping them.


text:
_TWO LOTTERY TICKETS_ (Romanian: _DOUĂ LOZURI_) is a 2016 Romanian comedy film directed by Paul Negoescu[1] and loosely based on Waking Ned. It is a story of a working man losing his lottery ticket that was for a huge prize goes through bizarre events and takes another ticket and wins it. The name of the film is based on Ion Luca Caragiale's short story _Două loturi_.

Plot

Dinel is an auto-mechanic who is struggling and has marital problems. Sile is a carpenter and a gambler, habitually betting anything. Pompiliu is a government employee and a conspiracy theorist. The trio are friends and hearing Dinel's troubles they decide to try their luck at the lottery. They win the lottery, but Dinel, who kept the ticket, realizes he lost it when he was robbed by two thugs in front of his apartment. Pompiliu claims this is the Secret Service's doing, saying they give high price tickets to people as a retirement option that is without taxes. Sile doesn't believe it and urges Dinel to report the loss to the police. After having his palm read, Dinel comes to believe his wife is in a dire situation and requires his help—and for that he needs the money. Together, they start searching for the stolen golden ticket.

Cast

-   Dragoș Bucur as Sile
-   Dorian Boguță as Dinel
-   Alexandru Papadopol as Pompiliu

Reception

_The Hollywood Reporter_ said of the film, “Though _Two Lottery Tickets_’ budget must have been modest, there is no sense that compromises had to be made to tell the story currently onscreen. The standout technical credit, beyond the cinematography, is the guitar-driven score, which at times infuses the film with something of a country vibe.”[2]

[1]

[2]

title: Two Lottery Tickets

question: What is the film 'Two Lottery Tickets' all about?

answer: It is about a working man who loses his lottery ticket but goes through a bizarre set of events where he ends up with another winning lottery ticket.

question: Who is the main protagonist of the movie?

answer: Dinel, an auto mechanic struggling with marital problems.

question: Who is Paul Negoescu?

answer: He is the film's director.

question: Where is the film 'Two Lottery Tickets' loosely based?

answer: Waking Ned and Ion Luca Caragiale's short story Două loturi.

question: Write a ~3 sentence summary.

answer: Two Lottery Tickets is a 2016 Romanian comedy film loosely based on Waking Ned and Ion Luca Caragiale's short story, Două loturi, which shares the same name. Directed by Paul Negoescu, the film stars Dragoș Bucur (Sile), Dorian Boguță (Dinel), and Alexandru Papadopol (Pompiliu). The story follows Dinel, a working man who lost a winning lottery ticket and found another one via bizarre circumstances.


text:
Here are photographs and the story of a rustic owner-built home in remote Prince of Wales island in Southeast Alaska:

“I picked a plan from CountryPlans for the design and affordability.  Like most of us everything is always a stretch financially and this was no different!  I wanted a plan that used common materials and dimensions to keep costs down and this was it.  One step at a time and my cabin came to life.  Finding a lot with a low initial cost and easy financing was first and the University of Alaska made that happen. Each step was the total of what I had available to put into the cabin.  I did not buy the lot and imagine the cost would be X dollars. There would have been no cabin if I imagined the total cost of construction.  After purchasing the lot, my only focus was getting building site cleared. The focus was then the foundation and so on.  I had no idea how long the cabin would take. Each time I would begin collecting what I needed from a variety of places.  I became a fan of Craigslist!  I would watch daily and collect things such as a $50.00 wood stove and the slate remnants to put behind it.   With no timelines, costs go way down. Everything was exciting and became part of my dream as I imagined it being used.

As construction began, the dreams developed into memories.  We went from camping on a gravel pad to a cabin over 5 years.  We froze inside with a roof over our heads but no windows or heat and tar paper on the exterior walls.  But in the morning we woke up to our dreams again.  The steaming cup of coffee quickly made us forget that we were "roughing it." Windows and insulation WOW now we are living the high life! Pasta and Ragu cooked over a camp stove teetering on a scrap piece of plywood made into a makeshift kitchen counter and we may as well been at the Ritz! I really can't express how exciting each step was for myself, my family and friends.  I have never regretted starting my Cabin.  If I were 5 years into it and had just a one room 12x16 with a simple plywood loft and an unfinished interior, I would still be as excited as I am today.

So what is the point of all of this babbling?  In the words of the Nike marketing department, 'just do it!'  I was as excited as a kid at Christmas with just a set of plans and a dream.  Now I have a cabin, a heart full of memories and family and friends with a place they can use for life. It was one step at a time.  Make no mistake. My friends put in countless hours of blood and sweat into this cabin.  For that I will always be grateful, and I hope they have fond memories as well. My advice to others would be to just get started and look to the great help of the Country Plans members for assistance.

Thanks, John, for creating CountryPlans.  If I had not found your site with cabins for all of us, I very well might still be dreaming.

Mike Cowan”

question: What is the main plot point of the story?

answer: Mike builds a cabin using the plans he got from CountryPlans.

question: How long did it take to build the cabin?

answer: Over 5 years.

question: Where did he source his materials?

answer: From a variety of sources including Craiglist.

question: Who wrote the text?

answer: Mike Cowan

question: Write a ~1 sentence summary.

answer: The text describes the experience of Mike Cowan with building a cabin with plans he got from CountryPlans.


text:
CLINICAL TRIALS PUBLICATION is having research published in a peer reviewed journal following clinical trials. Most investigators will want to have such a publication but the nature of clinical trials may create special considerations and obstacles.

Most agreements for a clinical trial between sponsor and investigator grants that the sponsor may control publication of results by requesting publication delays, deleting portions of a manuscript, or placing limits on the types of issues that can be discussed. These controls serve to prevent disclosure of information that would compromise the sponsor's ability to patent inventions; to prevent disclosure of confidential information shared with investigator; and to coordinate the disclosure of results when a clinical trial is being conducted at multiple sites. These are legitimate business concerns, but may not restrict the investigator from freely publishing research results in the end of the study and approval process.

Due to repeated accusations and findings that some clinical trials conducted or funded by pharmaceutical companies may report only positive results for the preferred medication, the industry has been looked at much more closely by independent groups and government agencies.[1] Issues and responses have included guidelines to limit financial inducements to researchers,[2] journal articles presented as academic research actually being 'ghost-written' by pharmaceutical companies,[3] litigation to deter or suppress publication of negative findings, concerns, or cheaper alternatives.[4][5] and laws in the United States requiring advanced clinical trials to be registered on a public government website.[6]

[1]

[2] Moynihan R (2003-05- cvc31). Who pays for the pizza? Redefining the relationships between doctors and drug companies. 2: Disentanglement. _BMJ: British Medical Journal_. Volume 326, Issue 7400, Pages 1193–1196. Retrieved on 2007-10-06.

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

title: Clinical trials publication

question: Why do sponsors want to control the publication of research results?

answer: Because they need to coordinate disclosure of information.

question: Why has the pharmaceutical industry been looked at much more closely by independent groups and government agencies?

answer: To prevent pharmaceutical companies from reporting only positive results.

question: Are academic articles reliable?

answer: Not always as they may be ghost-written by pharmaceutical companies.

question: Can pharmaceutical companies restrict publishing research results?

answer: No, they can delay but not restrict publishing results.


text:
[Frontispiece to Richard Bentley's _The Folly of Atheism_ (Boyle Lectures, 1692)] Atheism, as defined by the entry in Diderot and d'Alembert's _Encyclopédie_ is “the opinion of those who deny the existence of a God in the world. The simple ignorance of God doesn't constitute _atheism_. To be charged with the odious title of _atheism_ one must have the notion of God and reject it.” In the period of the Enlightenment, avowed and open atheism was made possible by the advance of religious toleration, but was also far from encouraged.

Accusations of atheism were common, but most of the people suspected by their peers of atheism were not actually atheist. D'Holbach and Denis Diderot seem to be two of the very small number of publicly identified atheists in Europe during this period. Thomas Hobbes was widely viewed as an atheist for his materialist interpretation of scripture—Henry Hammond, a former friend, described him in a letter as a “Christian Atheist”. David Hume was accused of atheism for his writings on the “natural history of religion”;[1] Pierre Bayle was accused of atheism for defending the possibility of an ethical atheist society in his _Critical Dictionary_; and Baruch Spinoza was frequently regarded as an atheist for his “pantheism”. However, all three of these figures defended themselves against such accusations.

Rise of toleration

In the Reformation and Counter-Reformation eras, Europe was a “persecuting society” which did not tolerate religious minorities or atheism.[2] Even in France, where the Edict of Nantes had been issued in 1598, then revoked in 1685, there was very little support for religious toleration at the beginning of the eighteenth century.[3] States were concerned with maintaining religious uniformity for two reasons: first, they believed that their chosen confession was the way to God and other religions were heretical, and second, religious unity was necessary for social and political stability.[4] The advancement of toleration was the result of pragmatic political motives as well as the principles espoused by Enlightenment _philosophes_. Religion was a central topic of conversation during much of the eighteenth century. It was the subject of debate in the coffeehouses and debate societies of Enlightenment Europe, and a bone of contention among the _philosophes_. Michael J. Buckley describes the rise of toleration, and of atheism itself, as a response to religious violence in the preceding years: the expulsion of the Huguenots from France, the Spanish inquisition, the witch trials, the civil wars of England, Scotland and the Netherlands. Buckley argues that “religious warfare had irrevocably discredited confessional primacy in the growing secularized sensitivity of much of European culture.” This is a view echoed by Ole Peter Brell and Ray Porter. Marisa Linton, however, points out that it was a common conception that religious diversity would lead to unrest and possibly civil war.[5]

According to Justin Champion, the question in England was not one of determining religious truth, whether or not there was a god, but rather one of understanding how the priesthood had gained the power to determine what was accepted as truth.[6] Republican radicals like Henry Stubbe, Charles Blount and John Toland understood religion as a social and cultural institution, rather than as transcendent principles.[7] They were primarily motivated by priestly fraud or “priestcraft”. The second half of Thomas Hobbes' book Leviathan contains an example of this sort of anticlerical thought. Hobbes, like Toland and other anticlerical writers of the period, understood religion in terms of history. By viewing religious truth and the church as separate, they helped open the way for further religious dissent.

Because France was an absolutist monarchy in which the king was seen as ruling by divine right, it was generally thought that French people had to share his religious views. The Edict of Nantes, which granted toleration to the Huguenot minority in France, was revoked in 1685. Marisa Linton argues that while the _philosophes_ did contribute to some extent to the rise of French toleration, the activities of French Huguenots also played a part: they began to worship more publicly in the more remote regions of France, and their continued loyalty to the French crown on the eve of and during the Seven Years' War may have helped to ease the monarch's suspicions about their faith.[8] In the mid-eighteenth century, Jansenist intellectuals began campaigning for religious toleration for Calvinists.[9] Linton argues that together, these causes shifted public opinion towards religious toleration.[10] Religious toleration was not accepted by everyone; for instance, Abbé Houtteville condemned the rise of toleration in France because it weakened ecclesiastical authority and encouraged irreligion. However, in 1787 Louis XVI granted an Edict of Toleration acknowledging their civil rights to marry and own property, although they were still denied the official right to worship and could not hold public office or become teachers.[11] Full religious toleration for Protestants would not be granted until the French Revolution.

Writers on toleration

The Dutch Jew Spinoza argued for individual freedom to express personal beliefs, while discouraging large congregations unless they belonged to a somewhat deistic idealized state religion. According to Spinoza, freedom of thought, speech and expression were the core values of toleration—as such, Spinoza opposed censorship. Jonathan Israel summarized his position, that anti-toleration laws were engineered “for personal advantage but also at great cost to the state and the public”, and that they exacerbated religious conflict rather than diminishing it. Spinoza constructed his theories about toleration based on a freedom to think rather than the right to worship, and was established according to philosophical principles rather than being based on any interpretation of scripture.[12] Consequently, Spinoza was essentially arguing for everyone, atheists, Catholics and Jews included.

Pierre Bayle was a strong advocate of tolerance, the basis of a quarrel with Louis XIV.[13] He even defended the idea of an ethical atheist society in his famous dictionary. Martin Fitzpatrick credits him with making a “powerful contribution to the way _philosophes_ would wage war on intolerance and superstition”.[14] Although he wanted to diminish the influence of Spinoza, Bayle was treated in a similar fashion by the Huguenots of the United Provinces, who saw him as a dangerous thinker and a potential atheist.[15]

John Locke suggested a pragmatic view of toleration,[16] although he advanced a concept of toleration only between certain Christian sects. He vehemently denied the atheists' right to toleration since they did not believe in a god, practiced no recognizable form of worship, and were not seeking to save their souls. He similarly denied toleration to Catholics on the grounds that papal authority made them a danger to the state. In essence, Locke advanced a freedom of worship, not a freedom of thought. The vast majority of eighteenth-century writers, like Locke, had no interest in granting religious tolerance to ideas that deviated from the core of revealed religion. Most of these writers were strongly opposed to Spinoza's ideal of toleration, which is “chiefly about individual freedom and decidedly not the freedom of large ecclesiastical structures to impose themselves on society”.

Voltaire, in his 1763 “A Treatise on Toleration”, continued in the tradition of John Locke, arguing that toleration allowed communication and good relationships between differing confessions in the marketplace.[17] Allowing the Huguenots to return to France would boost the French economy.[18] He would not be the only one to espouse this viewpoint.

Opponents tended to conflate the views of those who wrote in favour of toleration under the heading of dangerous anti-orthodoxy and atheism, despite their radically differing viewpoints and confessions.

Related philosophical movements

Deism

Deism is the philosophical belief in a deity based on reason rather than religious revelation or dogma. It was a popular perception among the _philosophes_, who adopted deistic attitudes to varying degrees. Deism, in this respect, is very different from atheism, which denies the existence of a deity altogether. Voltaire, for instance, was convinced that the existence of god was a demonstrable fact. The deistic god, however, often bore little resemblance to the God of Christian scripture, which meant that deists were often heavily criticized by the adherents of confessional faiths and could be accused of atheism.

Deists often pushed for religious toleration, a move which would have supported the open expression of atheism. This is not because they supported atheism—they did not—but because deist philosophers tended to be in favour of the civil freedom of conscience. As Michael J. Buckley writes, “If atheism was unacceptable, superstition and fanaticism were even more so.” Deists were not pro-atheist, but their anticlerical leanings indirectly benefited the evolution of atheism.

In historiographical terms, it has been quite common to see a close link between deism and atheism. Buckley critiques Peter Gay's view of the direct tie between deism and atheism, writing, “the vectors which Gay charts are certainly there, but the distinction may be somewhat too neat, too overdrawn.” Louis Dupré describes deism as “the result of a filtering process that had strained off all historical and dogmatic data from Christian theology and retained only that minimum which, by eighteenth-century standards, reason demands.”[19] Atheism is perhaps the same process taken a step further. Buckley credits the rise of atheism with the gradual submission of theology to philosophy—as thinkers, including church leaders, began to argue religion on philosophical terms, they opened the way for disbelief—they made atheism thinkable. Deism is, in this perspective, a complicated waypoint on the path to atheism: deism is the philosophical belief in a deity based on reason. Once belief in God is based on reason, it becomes thinkable to reason one's way into disbelief.

Freemasonry

Freemasons in continental Europe during the Enlightenment era were accused of atheism. The masonic “Constitutions” of 1723 are vague on the matter of religion, stating that if a Freemason “rightly understands the Art, he will never be a stupid Atheist, nor an irreligious Libertine”, while also asking that he follow “that religion to which all men agree, leaving their particular opinions to themselves”.[20] Although Masonic literature referred sporadically and vaguely to a “Grand Architect of the Universe”, their secretive practices made the religious affiliation of each Freemason a matter of speculation.

Freemasonic culture originated in Britain and spread to the Continent, bringing with it ideas about natural rights and the rights of the governed. In some areas, Continental Freemasonry may have drawn from more subversive English sources. Margaret C. Jacob outlines a relationship between John Toland and Dutch Freemasonry; Jean Rousset de Missy, the founder of the Masonic lodge in the Dutch Republic in 1735 was a self-described pantheist, borrowing the term coined by Toland. Jacob argues that “there is a streak of freethinking or deism that turns up at moments in the history of Continental Freemasonry right into, and especially during, the 1790s.”[21] This religious ambiguity could be interpreted as contributing to the “thinkability” of atheism.

Contemporary perspectives

Spinoza

Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677), in his 1670 _Theologico-Political Treatise_, criticized Judaism (his birth religion) and all organized religion. His philosophical orientation is often called “pantheism”, a term coined by John Toland after Spinoza's death. However, in the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Spinoza's name was often associated with atheism, freethinking, materialism, deism, and any other heterodox religious belief. Whether or not “pantheism” constitutes atheism is still debated by modern scholars.[22]

Pierre Bayle

Pierre Bayle (1647–1706) was widely accused of atheism for his espousal of religious toleration, although he professed himself a Huguenot. He encountered a great deal of criticism for defending atheism. In his _Dictionnaire historique et critique_ he stated that while atheists were “exceedingly blind and ignorant of the nature of things” there were many atheists “who are no way distinguished for their vices”, and that “if atheists exist, who, morally speaking, are well-disposed, it follows that Atheism is not a necessary cause of immorality, but simply an incidental one in regard to those who would have been immoral from disposition or temperament, whether Atheists or not.” In response to criticism, he included an essay “Clarifications: On Atheists” in the 1702 edition of the Dictionary. In it, he continued defending his thesis that “there have been atheists and Epicureans whose propriety in moral matters has surpassed that of most idolators”, arguing that religion is not the sole basis of morality. It is, he wrote, “a very likely possibility that some men without religion are more motivated to lead a decent, moral life by their constitution, in conjunction with the love of praise and the fear of disgrace, than are some others by the instincts of conscience.”

David Hume

David Hume (1711–1776) was often seen as an atheist in his own day. His skeptical attitude toward religion in such works as “Of Superstition and Religion”, “Essays Moral and Political”, “On Suicide”, “On the Immortality of the Soul”, “Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion”, as well as his death-bed conversations with Boswell (later published), earned Hume the reputation as a practicing atheist. Hume was even turned down for a teaching position at the University of Edinburgh in the 1740s because of his alleged atheism.[23]

Diderot

Denis Diderot (1713–1784) was one of the central guests of D'Holbach's salon and the primary editor of the _Encyclopédie_. Although Diderot wrote extensively about atheism, he was not as polemic as D'Holbach or Naigeon—instead of publishing his atheistic works, he tended to circulate them among his friends or give them to Naigeon for posthumous publishing.[24] Diderot espoused a materialist worldview. He attempted to solve the problems of how the cosmos could begin without a creator, and theorized about how life could come from inorganic matter. According to Dupré, Diderot concluded that if one abandons “the unproved principle that the cosmos must have a beginning”[25] then the need to establish the “efficient cause” of creation is no longer a problem. Diderot thought that the origin of life might be a process of the natural internal evolution of matter.

D'Holbach

Baron d'Holbach (1723–1789) was the central figure of the 'coterie holbachique'[26] and the salon he hosted in his Paris home. The salon has been interpreted as a meeting place for Parisian atheists, based on an anecdote in which D'Holbach told David Hume, who claimed not to believe anything, that of the eighteen guests at his salon, fifteen were atheists and three had not yet decided. There is some doubt as to the accuracy of this statement.[27] In any case, D'Holbach himself was a professed atheist. The salon was the site of a great deal of discussion about atheism, and the atheistic and theistic guests seem to have spent a great deal of time good-naturedly arguing for their respective positions.[28] Despite claims that the salon was a hotbed of atheism, there seem to only have been three convinced atheists in regular attendance: D'Holbach, Denis Diderot and Jacques-André Naigeon.

D'Holbach's written works often included atheistic themes. Alan Charles Kors cites three in particular, _Système de la nature_, _Le Bon-sens_ and _La Morale universelle_ as being particularly concerned with advancing the cause of atheism. Kors summarized some of the basic themes of these three texts as the idea that rigorous materialism was the only coherent viewpoint, and that “the only humane and beneficial morality was one deduced from the imperatives for the happiness and survival of mankind.”[29] What was relatively unique about D'Holbach was that, as Kors writes, he “was an atheist, and he proselytized”.[30]

The _Encyclopédie_

Although the _Encyclopédie_ (published 1751–1772) was driven and edited by the atheist Denis Diderot, the encyclopedia's articles on atheism and atheists take a negative tone, having been written by the pastor Jean-Henri-Samuel Formey and the abbé Claude Yvon. This was probably the most common conception of atheism by the public and by some of the “philosophes”. Yvon identifies the main causes of atheism as ignorance and stupidity, and debauchery and the corruption of morals. The article “Athées” is primarily concerned with refuting Bayle's assertions, insisting that atheists “cannot have an exact and complete understanding of the morality of human actions”.

Notes

Sources

-   -   -   -   Champion, Justin. _The Pillars of Priestcraft Shaken: The Church of England and its Enemies, 1660–1730_. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
-   Champion, Justin. “Toleration and Citizenship in Enlightenment England: John Toland and the Naturalization of the Jews, 1714–1753.” In _Toleration in Enlightenment Europe_, edited by Ole Peter Grell and Roy Porter, 133–156. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
-   Dupré, Louis. _Religion and the Rise of Modern Culture_. Notre Dama, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 2008.
-   Grell, Ole Peter and Roy Porter. “Toleration in Enlightenment Europe.” In _Toleration in Enlightenment Europe_, edited by Ole Peter Grell and Roy Porter, 1–22. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
-   -   -   Jacob, Margaret C. _Living the Enlightenment: Freemasonry and Politics in Eighteenth-Century Europe_. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.
-   Kors, Alan Charles. _D'Holbach's Coterie: An Enlightenment in Paris_. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1976.
-   Linton, Marisa. “Citizenship and Religious Toleration in France.” In _Toleration in Enlightenment Europe_, edited by Ole Peter Grell and Roy Porter, 157–174. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
-   Russell, Paul. “The Riddle of Hume's Treatise: Skepticism, Naturalism and Irreligion.” New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.
-   Tomaselli, Sylvana. “Intolerance, the Virtue of Princes and Radicals.” In _Toleration in Enlightenment Europe_, edited by Ole Peter Grell and Roy Porter, 86–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
-   -   Robert Morrissey (ed.)

-   Robert Morrissey (ed.)

Further reading

-   Buckley, Michael J. SJ. _Denying and Disclosing God: The Ambiguous Process of Modern Atheism_
-   Baron d'Holbach, _The System of Nature_
-   -   Kors, Alan Charles, _Atheism in France, 1650–1729: The Orthodox Sources of Disbelief_

Category:Atheism Category:Enlightenment philosophy

[1] Hume on Religion (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

[2] Ole Peter Grell and Roy Porter, “Toleration in Enlightenment and Europe” in _Toleration in Enlightenment Europe_, ed. Ole Peter Grell and Roy Porter (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 1.

[3] Marisa Linton, “Citizenship and Religious Toleration in France” in _Toleration in Enlightenment Europe_, ed. Ole Peter Grell and Roy Porter (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 157.

[4] Linton, 157–158.

[5] Linton, 158.

[6] Justin Champion, _The Pillars of Priestcraft Shaken_ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 7.

[7] Champion (1992), 134.

[8] Linton, 169

[9] Linton, 170.

[10] Linton, 172.

[11]

[12] Justin Champion, “Toleration and Citizenship in Enlightenment England: John Toland and the Naturalization of the Jews, 1714–1753” in _Toleration in Enlightenment Europe_, ed. Ole Peter Grell and Roy Porter (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 135.

[13] Marin Fitzpatrick, “Toleration and the Enlightenment Movement” in _Toleration in Enlightenment Europe,_ ed. Ole Peter Grell and Ray Porter (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 36.

[14] Fitzpatrick, 36.

[15]

[16] Tomaselli, 93

[17] Grell and Porter, 4–5

[18] Sylvana Tomaselli, “Intolerance, the Virtue of Princes and Radicals” in _Toleration in Enlightenment Europe_, ed. Ole Peter Grell and Ray Porter (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 93.

[19] Louis Dupré, _Religion and the Rise of Modern Culture_ (Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 2008), 43

[20] Margaret C. Jacob, _Living the Enlightenment: Freemasonry and Politics in Eighteenth-Century Europe_ (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), 87

[21] Jacob, 94.

[22] Baruch Spinoza, _Theologico-Political Treatise_, originally published anonymously in 1670; Israel, Jonathan I., _Radical Enlightenment_. Oxford University Press: 2001. ; Spinoza is also mentioned in Christopher Hitchens' _The Portable Atheist_, 2007.

[23] Douglas Nobbs, 'The Political Ideas of William Cleghorn, Hume's Academic Rival', in Journal of the History of Ideas, (1965), Vol. 26, No. 4: 575–586; Boswell, J. Boswell in Extremes, 1776–1778.

[24] Kors, 47.

[25] Dupré, 50.

[26] Alan Charles Kors, _D'Holbach's Coterie: An Enlightenment in Paris_ (Princeton University Press, 1976), 9

[27] See Alan Charles Kors, _D'Holbach's Coterie_ 41–42 for a discussion of this claim.

[28] Kors, 42–43

[29] Kors, 45.

[30]

title: Atheism during the Age of Enlightenment

question: According to Diderot and d'Alembert, can an atheist be ignorant of God?

answer: No, according to Diderot and d'Alembert an atheist must be aware of the notion of God and reject it.

question: Why was Baruch Spinoza accused of atheism?

answer: Baruch Spinoza was accused of atheism for is pantheism.

question: When was the Edict of Nantes issued?

answer: The Edict of Nantes was issued in 1598.

question: Who did the Edict of Nantes grant toleration to?

answer: The Edict of Nantes granted toleration to the Huguenots.

question: What edict did Louis XVI grant in 1787?

answer: Louis XVI granted an Edict of Toleration in 1787.

question: Who wrote A Treatise on Toleration in 1763?

answer: Voltaire wrote A Treatise on Toleration in 1763.

question: What is deism?

answer: Deism is the philosophical belief in a deity based on reason, not religious dogma.

question: When were the Masonic Constitutions written?

answer: The Masonic Constitutions were written in 1723.

question: Write a ~3 sentence summary.

answer: During the Age of Enlightenment, atheism as a philosophy began to spread and become more widely accepted. Many groups and individuals were accused of being atheists. Many of these groups and individuals shared some ideas with atheists, but were not atheists themselves.


text:
When I was a boy, I met a most fascinating man. By his outward appearance, you would never think much of him. He lived a simple life, and expected little from those around him.

His name was Park, Young Woo. He was a kind old man who loved to talk about many things. He could talk about almost any topic and he would make it very interesting just to sit and listen to his stories.

The war had just ended when I met him. The army from the north had invaded our country and many people were hungry and tired. Yet Park, Young Woo was always happy and he helped to cheer up the people around him.

What made him the most interesting was he lived in a house built of scraps of wood, cardboard, and metal he had found along the road. Most of the house was made of cardboard. He cut small windows in the walls of his box in order to let in the light. On the top, he put pieces of metal to keep out the rain. It was only one room, but it was enough for him and his dog.

Most of the time he sat in front of his shanty with his dog lying beside him, offering to repair shoes. In a small wooden shoe box, he had some thread, pieces of leather, colored polish, and glue. If a person left their shoes with him in the morning, they were ready in the evening. People would always say what a wonderful a job he had done.

Day after day, he sat in front of his box repairing shoes. While he worked, he would tell stories to anyone who would listen. He would do most of his work on his right knee while sitting on a small stool. His dog lay beside him. He was very good at what he did. His reputation as a cobbler spread throughout our little village, but most of all, people loved to hear him tell stories of when he was a young boy living on the farm with his family.

While he worked, he would either hum songs or whistle. He enjoyed his work very much. When someone would walk by, he would begin a conversation. Most people would stop and chat with him for a short time, but sometimes they would sit and talk with him for hours. He was a wise old man, and there was nothing he would not discuss.

On my way to school, I would stop to talk to him. He was always very busy repairing a pair of shoes, but he still talked to me.

One day, I heard a new sound coming from the cardboard box. It was beautiful music. At first, I thought it was a radio playing the music, but when I got close to his box, I realized that he was playing a violin. He was playing it so gently and sweetly that the entire place was filled with joy.

Other people began to gather to listen to the music coming from the old shoemaker.

He played and played. He played familiar songs and songs I had never heard before. The people who had gathered to listen were absolutely silent.

When he finished, the people clapped and asked for more. He bowed at the waist and played again. It was dark when he finally said good-bye and disappeared into his small cardboard box.

Everyone in the town began to talk about the music from the old man. No one remembered hearing music played like that before.

The next day I asked him where he had gotten the violin he was playing. He told me that he had traded it in exchange for repairing an old pair of shoes for a lady in the city. He said it was not a very good violin, but it was nice to play again.

I asked him where he learned to play so well.

He told me that he had played all of his life but, when the war came, his violin had been destroyed. He did not have enough money to buy another one, but now he would be able to make music anytime he wanted. He had a big smile on his face.

Many of the people who he had fixed shoes for, decided to collect money to buy him a new violin. Then they would ask him to play for them.

Everyone became excited about the idea. I even gave some money to help buy the new violin.

Every day the old man played his old violin and filled the street with soft gentle music. More and more people came to hear him play. Many people gave money.

When there was enough money collected, the leader of our village went to the city and purchased a new violin. The plan was for the old shoemaker to come to the park. They planned to ask him to play for the town, and then they would give him his new violin.

On the day he was to receive the violin, a young boy was sent to ask him to come to the park to play for everyone. Usually, the old man only stayed at his cardboard box. He did not like to go other places very often.
It seemed like a very long time when the young boy came back alone. He told us something was wrong. The old man would not wake up.

The leaders of the town went quickly to his cardboard box to see what the young boy was talking about.
When they returned, they told us the old man had passed away, probably the night before. Everyone began to cry.

The leaders of our village turned the place where the old man lived into a special memorial. They left everything the way he had lived. His shoe box, his old violin, his bed, and everything else he had, was kept just the way he had left it when he died.

title: Man in a Box

question: Who is the narrator?

answer: An unnamed boy

question: Where does this take place?

answer: It is unclear where exactly this takes place

question: What is the war that is referenced in the story>

answer: It is unclear which war is being referenced.

question: How did Park, Young Woo make money?

answer: He repaired shoes.

question: Write a ~7 sentence summary.

answer: Park, Young Woo was an old man who lived in a shanty house. He repaired shows for a living. One day, music is heard from his house. He comes out with an old violin and plays it beautifully. The people love his playing so much that they raise enough money for a new violin for the man. When they get the violin, a young boy tells the people that Park, Young Woo won't wake up. They find out he has died, and keeps his house exactly as it was after his death.


text:
William Porterfield’s offstump lay uprooted on the floor, wrecked by a ball from Mohammad Amir that swung too much, too late and too quickly. Half an hour into Ireland’s maiden Test innings, their captain trudged off with his country 5-3.

Shortly after the players returned from lunch, Niall O’Brien was pinned on the knee by an in-ducker from Mohammad Abbas. Not yet 50 balls in, Ireland were 7-4. To be at Malahide, on a day in which 109 ex-Irish internationals came to celebrate their momentous achievement in gaining Test status, felt like intruding upon private grief.

Stories of how onerous Test cricket is are more than just old fables. This is a format so exacting that it took New Zealand 44 matches before recording their first win, India 24 and, most recently, Bangladesh 34. Now, Ireland were finding out as much.

Ed Joyce had extended his magnificent career into his 40th year to finally earn a Test cap. He deserved better than for his first innings to be truncated after four balls by an lbw decision when the ball pitched outside legstump. The financial inequities in world cricket are such that Cricket Ireland could not afford the £35,000 the Decision Review System would have cost.

And yet this was also a day that showed what Test cricket means. After Amir’s incisiveness, Abbas’s remorselessness and Shadab Khan’s googlies had pushed Ireland into the desolation of 61-7 - a score that prompted fears that the Test would finish later in the same day, and frenetic googling of the lowest score by a Test nation on debut (84, by South Africa in 1889) - Gary Wilson walked out to bat.

His day began when a ball smashed him on the elbow in the nets. Rather than take the field, as Tim Murtagh bowled immaculately with the second new ball before Pakistan opportunistically declared half an hour before lunch, Wilson was forced to hospital for scans. He prepared for his first Test innings by taking pain-killers to dilute the pain. "It had to be done," he said.

When he entered at number nine, Wilson was in the most pain that he has ever known on a cricket field. He thought that he might only be able to block, but worked out that he could use the pace of the ball to sweep, reverse-sweep and deflect. His stoicism and skill hauled Ireland up from the ignominy of failing to reach triple figures in their maiden Test innings. The standing ovation from many fans when Boyd Rankin edged a ball through the slips to bring up the team’s hundred betrayed how harrowing Ireland’s experience had been. If it could have been so much worse, 130 was still really no sort of score at all.

With 26 overs remaining before the close when Pakistan opted to enforce the follow-on, the thought of what state Ireland’s second innings would be by the day’s end was a chastening one - especially in the split seconds between Joyce edging the third ball of the innings behind and the chance being shelled. Two overs later, Porterfield also edged Amir behind; this time, he was reprieved by third slip.

Yet, for all the fear and foreboding, Joyce unfurled a couple of his picturesque drives, imbued with impeccable purity of timing. Ireland had their first ever half-century stand in Tests to cheer.

With this bucolic ground covered in evening sunshine, Joyce and Porterfield walked off just about able to glimpse the promise that Test cricket won’t always be this brutal.

question: How did Ireland's perspective of the game change by the end of te match?

answer: Ireland were excited to be given a chance to play in a Test match. The game did not go well and they ended up losing on the first day of the test, a rarity in most test games. The Irish team was subject to a controversial decision that they could not afford to pay for review. Though Ireland left the field defeated, they did leave knowing that it wouldn't always be so brutal.

question: Was Pakistan's performance a testament to their training and expertise in the sport?

answer: Almost certainly, their experience in test matches has their reputation globally can attest to this. The evidence lies in decisions by the team and actions by the players. Highlighted were Amir's incisiveness, Abbas's remorselessness and Shadab Khan's googlies, which pushed Ireland's score way behind (67-7)

question: Was the game described a good game of cricket?

question: Why was Ireland's score so low?

answer: This was their first Test innings, and the level of play was much higher than the national team was used to. Since they could not afford a standard review of decisions made during the match, it would be fair to assume that they did not have the same facilities for training as a country like Pakistan, where it really is their most popular sport.


text:
[Top 7 Reasons to Attend The SPARK]

Blog Posts

Walking in Grace Blog.  Walking in Grace, Inc. Laura Longville. Rapid City Counselor. Intensives. Equine Workshops. Motivational Speaker. Faith Based Motivation. Faith Counseling. Counseling.

We are almost 8 weeks away from The SPARK. On some level it seems like a long way off, but it will be here before you know it!

I’m here to encourage you to take this time, November 11-13, 2016 for yourself. Be intentional about this time for you; mark it off your calendar, ask your family for the support and know that you will be changed!

Here are the top 7 reasons you need to attend The SPARK. There are still some gifts available for the first 10 to register. Don’t miss out.

#7 REASON TO ATTEND THE SPARK- HAVE FUN WITH OTHER LIKE-MINDED AND UNIQUE WOMEN. We can all use a little fun!!

#6 COMMUNICATE MORE HONESTLY & OPENLY TO ACCOMPLISH YOUR GOALS. It’s helpful to have an environment, like The OWN/SPARK where we come together and explore our work and personal lives. We learn to drop into a deeper level of awareness and honesty, which in turns makes us empowered women!

#5 NAVIGATE THE EMOTIONAL ISSUES WITH MONEY. We all have beliefs about money that impact our lives. We’ll learn to embrace the beliefs that serve us well.

#4 YOU'LL LEARN NEW WAYS TO DEAL WITH INADEQUACY. Unfortunately, we all experience feeling not good enough and wonder if it’s really worth it. We’ll learn how to leave that behind so we can confidently be “all in” in our lives.

#3 WHEN SAFETY & TRUST IS CREATED, CREATIVITY INCREASES. Join this fantastic group of women and make it a secure place to share from the heart. We can all use a fresh, renewed perspective to inspire our lives!

#2 REST & RELAXATION ARE GOOD FOR THE BODY, MIND AND SOUL! It’s amazing what a little sleep, movement and meditation can do for your heart.

#1 REASON TO ATTEND THE SPARK. YOU NEED IT! Put yourself first. I know…..it’s hard to put yourself first because there are so many others needs screaming at you. I know that when we take care of ourselves first, we have so much more to offer others.

I hope you’re wholeheartedly in for this experience together. I believe it will SPARK and light you up to finish out 2016 and prepare you for the New Year.

Click here for more information and to register. If you have any questions please call Laura at 605.381.9435 or email me

question: What is The Spark?

answer: The Spark appears to be a weekend of workshops tailored for women to bring out the best versions of themselves with other like-minded individuals. Focusing on encouraging goal oriented thinking in order to be one's' best self.

question: How are women encouraged to attend?

answer: The post lists a number of reasons to join The Spark, it also incentivises early sign up by saying the first 10 women to sign up will receive a gift.

question: Who writes the Walking in Grace blog?

answer: Unclear, though Laura Longville is involved in the event, she is not the writer of this particular post.

question: Write a ~1 sentence summary.

answer: A blog post regarding a retreat for women call THE SPARK, which took place in November of 2016.


text:
The sky is poetic when you consider it emotionally: sunsets draw tears and rolling tongues of clouds pull mouths open and vicious, wandering storms inspire dizzying cries for God or help or *someone*.

I am not poetic.

This is what makes me stare at the cottage-cheese ceiling in my room at night and wonder why I will never admire myself. I conjure you and watch you effortlessly twist nails into your hands, watch the wounds bleed ink and meaning, because you always told me you admired me but I never believed you, and the way your eyes would look not into me but behind me made me nervous and I think that’s why you could never really love me.

But I tried.

*Fuck you* I tried.

I tried and then I told myself that your angled good looks were beyond me and that your ancient, slippery tongue would never find mine and then I ached until I could convince myself of some flaw you weren’t aware of. I tangled myself into tight enough knots that I couldn’t walk straight and I couldn’t unwind myself for long enough to make hollow conversation or take deep enough breaths.

I wanted your easy wit and your offensive charm but I wanted you to give it to me like a lesson so I could hang it on the wall like a picture and remember the time I fell in love with the idea of a boy. And I didn’t care that I knew you would never feel awful, rooted things for me. I never cared about that.

And I made like I was finding myself or something because your body sitting next to mine made me feel shallow and hopeless and all I wanted to do was be *your* type of person and then you would let me crawl inside of you and decipher your secrets for myself.

You were different than anyone I knew with your swarming lies and your spangled lines of art and people and pale, tortured love stories. You drew me in with those choked eyes of yours like the depths of you were hungry for something you knew you would never have.

Storms strike first from a distance: all swirling, coked-up air and this graceful, rhythmic dance between high and low pressure that spins so far out of control it makes hearts grow restless even when all you can see of it makes it look like a gray, stretched-out cotton ball. I watch cagey men on National Geographic. I watch them crawl in head-first, greedy-eyed. I cringe at their middle fingers raised to the clouded sun.

You gutted me.

You gutted me and you didn’t realize that you’d done it because I didn’t turn myself inside-out for you like you thought I did. I absorbed you and leaked you back out and you smiled at me as if to say *you’re the girl I’ve been waiting for* and I was so drunk with your approval that I couldn’t look at my toenails without seeing them through your eyes.

But my heart pounded with each inch you let me head in your direction and you welcomed me with your spinning, wild arms and I smiled at you as if to say *you get all of me but you don’t get to know why* because that was my idea of mystery.

You didn’t ask questions.

I watch storm chasers and I watch twisters pick up houses and cows and spit them back out crumbled and worthless. I watch how the air, coiling, grins and doesn’t stop. I watch adrenaline-junkies point their cameras and get the shot and I watch their smiles: that kid on Christmas morning clutching a toy helicopter like it’s all he’s ever going to need.

I haven’t moved from this place since you left.

If I move I’ll get caught up in your backlash and your intelligent, twitching fingers with those sweet, tidy good-byes of yours. I’ll gag on the memory of you and your drugged march because you had to be going somewhere always, forced to inhale the comforting slant of your whole body, the one I knew like the curve of my own reflection.

I remember you gave me a notebook once, and you wrote my name in your earnest chicken scratch on the inside of the sturdy red cover and you told me *go crazy* but I didn’t. I sat and watched you scribble yourself into oblivion on your own blank pages. I could never dream up enough words to write a good sentence. You thought we were kindred, back then. You told me not to look for it, just to find it, and I would know. You told me a lot of things and I remember them all, but your words sit beside me like a pale sketch of you, eyes wide and shoulders slack. For a long time your words filled me up but now they’re just scraps of your character that I can’t seem to hide anywhere.

Sometimes I wish you were still here but mostly the riprap of ripped-up ground and shattered houses you have left me with feel like home enough to crawl into and sleep. The imprint of your body here is big enough so the sheets puff thick around my head and I’ll never have to breathe again.

You were poetic enough for the both of us.

title: Riprap

question: What does the author express in the text?

answer: The author expresses loss and suffering after a separation with a former lover.

question: What does the author feel gutted about?

answer: About being left by their loved one.

question: What does the author accuse the reader of?

answer: Of never really loving them.

question: Explain why the author never believed their lover to have loved them.

answer: Because of how their eyes did not look into theirs but to behind them.

question: Write a ~2 sentence summary.

answer: The author express loss and suffering after a separation from their former lover. The author accuses their lover to never have loved them and makes the author feel gutted.