Dating ministeri

I am very confused! My family for many years had told me I was looking for love in all the wrong places. I have been married and divorced. I am a single mom and have been single for a long time. About 8 months ago I started going to a church in our town. Soon after became a member. Recently there has been a line of communication started between the Minister (who is also divorced, no kids of ... Pastor Dating is the online dating website that introduces you to a new world of love, happiness, romance and dating, where you can meet thousands of single Pastors that are looking for somebody to love! Pastors lead a very busy life, devoted to their congregation; they hardly have any time left to go out and meet somebody. If you are a Pastor ... The only difference is that unlike any normal relationship, pastors keep their dating life secret until it finally ends in a marriage. So if you are thinking of dating a pastor, here are your dos and don’ts. Take A Zodiac Quiz. Dating A Pastor: Tips and Tricks 1. Keep it a Secret if you are Dating a Pastor 1. You have no right as a girlfriend or boyfriend to introduce your spouse when you are dating. It doesn't matter if you think you know him better than anyone else. Introducing a preacher before the sermon is a job that is reserved for the LEGALLY married! 2. Don't assume you have to work… Jehovah's Witnesses Dating. JWMatch is a safe and fun place for Jehovah's Witnesses and Friends to build loving and trusting friendships that can lead to lasting, offline relationships. The beauty of meeting and relating online is that you can gradually collect information from people before you make a choice about pursuing the relationship in the real world. Dating a pastor doesn’t naturally mean that you will grow spiritually. You must spend time in prayer and in the study of the word for your personal spiritual growth. Your relationship with God must come first. This is also important because many times, you will need to remind your man of the word. Pastors get discouraged too, and sometimes ... As it turns out, it's actually pretty great dating a future minister. Seminarians are super intelligent and love having the kinds of deep, philosophical conversations that former liberal arts ... 20 Confessions of a Minister's Wife. 07/06/2015 09:22 am ET Updated Dec 06, 2017 ... A photo of us in our early dating days. As I categorize myself as a novice preacher's wife (10 years in), I am still learning, growing and navigating my way through this very unique role. I still really don't know what I am doing and just strive to be my ... Dating a Minister. I have been seeing a minister for about three months (I need to warn the reader(s) this is a long explanation. He has made it quite clear he is looking for a wife. I too am open for a husband. I realize he is quite busy; he is a practicing psychiatrist and a bishop. Chalice: I only know the life of dating as a spiritual leader. I’ve been a preacher since I was 17, was ordained straight out of college, and was the pastor of a church by age 26. In college, dating was pretty much nonexistent. I was such a little fundamentalist. I would only date other “serious” Christians, and the pool was just super small.

So I've been thinking about disassociating myself for some time now but as of late this feeling has grown stronger to the point where I feel like I probably will and "should" do it. I'm looking for any words of wisdom anyone might be able to offer.

2020.09.17 11:11 WANYK47 So I've been thinking about disassociating myself for some time now but as of late this feeling has grown stronger to the point where I feel like I probably will and "should" do it. I'm looking for any words of wisdom anyone might be able to offer.

So I was baptized when I was 16 which means that I've nearly been a baptized Jehovah's Witness for 30 years. I've run the gamut pretty much from straight out of high school on fire pioneering for a couple of years, moving to where "the need was greater" and pioneering there, becoming a ministerial servant, attending ministerial servant school, having various responsibilities - probably one of the heaviest feeling was as an attendant at an assembly where "apostates" had been seen and being a stage "guard".
Anyway just a little quick background on me. I've always kind of ran hot and cold with "the truth". I'm sorry I have to put it in quotations because I just don't think it's "the truth" anymore as in "the one and only absolute truth" out there, the "only means of salvation" or whatever you wanna call it. I've been pretty inactive ever since around 2017 or shortly thereafter when a good friend of mine who was also a ministerial servant in our congregation committed suicide. He had been disfellowshipped for cheating on his wife and had a baby with the girl he cheated on her with. Yup, he screwed up, but he lost everything, his entire social circle, his family disowned him, even I pretended like I had some "right" to associate with him less. I feel terrible about that decision now because now all I can think to myself is that if I had only known how much pain he was in maybe I could have helped him.
I took his suicide pretty hard. I think about my friend almost every day, but, honestly the whole situation shook our entire congregation - some people even left the congregation and went to other congregations over it.
These days I no longer identify myself to others as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I don't carry an updated blood card (I have one but it's so far out of date it would probably never hold up in court - it's ripped and torn, dog eared corners). I no longer believe it, that's the bottom line. The biggest problem and probably the TL;DR for those of you who might be looking for one is that my current wife who is a really good woman, she is very PIMI, and my parents, step-sister and half-brother are all in. So...I could face the shunning issue, but my wife already knows I'm not interested and how I feel. Sometimes I tell her how I feel and she's like, "Can you make sure you don't say something like that in front of so and so..." lol The elders and others have long since seemed to have given up on me, they don't swing by for a visit anymore even before COVID although I suppose that's a good reason (excuse?) now.
Today at work - for one reason or another - the saying "I'd rather be hated for something I am than loved for something I'm not." kept running through my mind and the feeling got really strong that I should do it. I worked a 16-hour day at work today so as I write this I'm quite tired and have been awake for nearly 24 hours in a few more hours. So if I'm not making sense and/or rambling, sorry, and that's probably why. lol
Any advice? Anyone been there, done that, bought the t-shirt? I know I'm not going back to the levels I was previously. I don't plan on ever giving another talk from stage or Zoom, I plan on not logging another single hour of "service", I'm just done. I'm only in because of my family, really, that's the only thing holding me back. If they all for some odd reason tomorrow woke up and said, "you know what - I think it's all a bunch of malarkey", I'd probably be first in line.
I'm probably going to sleep for a bit so if I don't respond soon no offense. I just wanted to fire this off before I go to bed and forget about it or put it on the back burner again for a while. Input appreciated. Thanks!
submitted by WANYK47 to exjw [link] [comments]


2020.09.16 17:45 Thro4way4Re4sons Uhhh. Our local needs last night were selfish, self loathing, and straight up pharasaic.

It's that time of the month again. For the local needs. Now, in the past, I have to give it to them, my elders, there's been good local needs. But last night!
I guess somene in our congregation is dating a non witness or dating someone spiritually weak? Its the reason why the local needs was titles BE HAPPY WITH YOUR MARRIAGE (1 Corinthians 7:39).
The super pimi sub CO elder, started by saying how many witnesses have a happy marriages serving Jehovah and displaying a picture of some Asian couple all smiles on their wedding day. Now if course, I'm thinking to myself, someone in my hall is dating a non witness and I wonder who. But it's non of my business to thwart someone's happiness and love. Who am I to tell them you can't do that or you can't do this?
A watchtower from 1986 was cited titled above, I believe. It mentions that a sister should look for a brother just as the elders look for a potential Ministerial Servant. Hold on, so what this means to me is that the principle at 1 Timothy 3:8 is also a principle to find a potential boyfriend? Wow, it's has gone far beyond. The amount of works equals righteousness. This is contrary to what the Bible says. Belive in it or not.
Is he a spiritual man? Does he comment? How does he comment? How are his hours in service? How does he preach? What does he talk about?
Yes, he declared these questions as a guide for sisters to find a potential mate. I can only imagine what the person felt hearing this legalistic, authoritarian talk. And the amount of times the super pimi sub CO elder mention how his marriage was happy. Sure, sometimes we don't get along, but look how happy we are.
I guess Tony Morris had a talk were he mentioned if a young man is 22 and not a servant yet, why are you looking at him as a potential mate? From headquarters, they're telling sisters who to date and not too, among the witnesses.
Here's the kicker, at least for me.
"Parents. If your child comes to you and says: 'But I love him, he's handsome.' What are you going to do. If the mate is not spiritual or a non witness are you going to support that courtship? And if they end up marrying. Are you going to go to that wedding? Remember, jehovah tells us this is wrong. If you support this you will be guilty of violating that principle. And if they come out as gay? You'll lose disapproval from God. And let's say some friend supports it as well by chaperoning. They will be guilty from violating that same principal."
Now, this elder when he speaks is very passionate of what he says. I have no hate towards him. I hate what he based it on. Telling people what to do and what not to do. Again, at the end of the day this all comes from our lovely 8 friends over in New York.
I don't want to prevent someone's happiness. It's not my business who you marry as long as you're happy. And I truly wish I could put the recording here but it's in Spanish and for his privacy and mine, I won't.
I'm pretty sure you guys have heard worst Local Congregation needs.
Edit: I wanted to add something. He quoted some GB helper saying of an experience. I guess some brother married a non witness and she ended up getting baptized. Some sister came up to him and said "Jehovah has blessed you!" What did the GB helper say? Jehovah didn't bless him. He forgave him. I just want to say there's a few couples in our hall in that situation. I feel bad for them hearing this nonsense.
submitted by Thro4way4Re4sons to exjw [link] [comments]


2020.09.16 12:48 nyadnov [H] Various Games [W] Games from HB Simulation

Hello there!
Welcome to my trader page and feel free to drop a comment with your list of games if you see something interesting in my list of games.
Currently I'm looking for the games included in this HB offering. HMU if you have any of these games and interested in trading them for some of my games.
I'm also looking for PayPal/Steam wallet (Region: SEA) or CS GO/TF2 keys so I can buy the games that I want from Steam. BTC also works if you're into that.
Here are my rep pages:
SteamGameSwap Rep Page
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 1
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 2
Thanks for checking by and stay safe!
List of games:
Trading for PayPal/BTC only:
Humble Bundle Gift Links:
Unrevealed Keys:
submitted by nyadnov to SteamGameSwap [link] [comments]


2020.09.16 12:48 nyadnov [H] Various Games [W] Games from HB Simulation

Hello there!
Welcome to my trader page and feel free to drop a comment with your list of games if you see something interesting in my list of games.
Currently I'm looking for the games included in this HB offering. HMU if you have any of these games and interested in trading them for some of my games.
I'm also looking for PayPal/Steam wallet (Region: SEA) or CS GO/TF2 keys so I can buy the games that I want from Steam. BTC also works if you're into that.
Here are my rep pages:
SteamGameSwap Rep Page
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 1
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 2
Thanks for checking by and stay safe!
List of games:
Trading for PayPal/BTC only:
Humble Bundle Gift Links:
Unrevealed Keys:
submitted by nyadnov to indiegameswap [link] [comments]


2020.09.11 20:55 Shy5646 Is this how it really is in the JW organization if you're a single brother interested in courting??

Questions sisters will ask the elders about a baptized brother they are interested in:
1.In view of his age, what has prevented him from qualifying to serve as a ministerial servant? How is currently being used in the congregation? Is he reliable? Does he have a history of being with judicially? If so, is he on restrictions and when were they lifted? Has he ever struggled with viewing pornography or masturbation? Been accused or a victim of child abuse?
2.How would you describe his attitude towards the ministry? Is he a zealous publisher? Do you see evidence that he is trying to make disciples? Does he auxiliary pioneer often or talk about entering full-time service? Is he the type that would take the lead in organizing a group to work seldom-worked territory? Or, is he mostly a follower? Does he try to inspire others to do more in Jehovah’s service? Or, does he need to be inspired?
3.Is he viewed as exemplary by the elders and congregation? Do you view him as a young Timothy in the congregation? Does his comments reflect that he is a deep student of God’s Word? Which of the qualifications for elders described at 1 Tim Chapter 3 is his strength and weakness?
4.What convinces you, or not, that he has the mental, emotional and spiritual maturity to take care of a wife? Since he lives at home, do you think he is ready to manage his own household? Would he make a good father?
5.How well does he get along with others in the congregation? Does he have personality conflicts? If so, how has he resolved them? Do you see evidence that he treats his parents and sisters in the congregation with tenderness, understanding and respect? Is he prone to flirt and play the field, or have a reputation as a playboy or a flirt among those of the opposite sex?
6.If offended, is he quick to forgive?
7.What evidence do you see that he has a good comprehension of Bible principles and sound judgment?
8.If I were your daughter, would you encourage or discourage me from dating him with a view to marriage, and why?
submitted by Shy5646 to exjw [link] [comments]


2020.09.08 14:07 Jobsfocal1 RRB Group D, NTPC Exam Date 2020 -21 Released! ????? ????? ??????? Check Now

RRB Group D, NTPC Exam Date 2020 -21 Released! ????? ????? ??????? Check Now
Check the Latest RRB Exam Date 2020 which is Released Now! Want to participate in Level 1, Group D, Isolated & Ministerial categories, NTPC exam ????? ????? ??????? The schedule then checks the RRB Exam Date easily through this single page.
https://preview.redd.it/takg45zyzwl51.jpg?width=510&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9ad941a3aa1482fbd8872cfea08ec388cabee31e
submitted by Jobsfocal1 to u/Jobsfocal1 [link] [comments]


2020.09.07 07:38 PlasticCoffee Bills scheduled for discussion in Dáil Éireann from the 7th of September 2020 till the 13th of September 2020.

Bills scheduled for discussion in Dáil Éireann from the 7th of September 2020 till the 13th of September 2020.
This information was found on oireachtas.ie the official government website for the Government, Oireachtas.ie does say that the schedule is subject to change at short notice.
A lot of the descriptions are in legalese and they reference legal statutes and other laws, but these descriptions are from oireachtas.ie. If you follow the link you can also find a link to the bills in question themselves.
Let me know if you think this could be done better.
Bills scheduled for discussion
Subject to change at short notice
Tue, 8 Sep 2020
Defence (Amendment) Bill 2020 In Dáil Éireann
Sponsored by: Minister for Defence, Simon Coveney (FG)
Source: Government
Originating House: Dáil Éireann
Official Description :
Bill entitled an Act to amend the Defence Act 1954 and the Defence (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1979; and to provide for related matters.
Expanded Description :
This Bill (Insertion of new section 17A in Principal Act) inserts a new section (section 17A) into the Defence Act 1954 to permit the delegation by the Minister for Defence of a limited degree of control and authority over a Defence Forces contingent (referred to as ‘operational control’ in this amendment) deployed as part of an international force to the Force Commander of that force. The amendment will not alter the current command structure within the Irish Defence Forces but merely underpins current practice in relation to day to day operational control of contingents of the Permanent Defence Force (PDF) engaged in international operations.
A. The amendment provides that a delegation of operational control by the Minister for Defence to the Force Commander will be in writing and may be subject to such exceptions and limitations as the Minister may determine, having had regard to such requirements as are necessary for the efficient operation of the mission concerned. Any delegation of operational control will provide as follows:
(i) in so far as is necessary to ensure the efficient operation of a mission, provide that each member of the Defence Forces assigned to an international force led by a Force Commander shall comply with every lawful order issued to him or her by a member of the international force in his or her military chain of command, subject to any exclusions as may be specified in the written delegation;
(ii) provide that the military police component of the international force under the authority of the Force Commander may arrest and detain a member of the Defence Forces provided such member is handed over as soon as possible to the Irish contingent commander or the designated senior Irish officer;
(iii) provide that each member of the Defence Forces in respect of whom a delegation of operational control is made shall cooperate with the military police component of the international force;
(iv) include any other ancillary provisions in relation to the delegation of operational control as the Minister may deem to be necessary for the efficient operation of the mission to which the delegation refers.
B. This Bill includes a number of amendments to the Defence Act 1954 to facilitate the re-enlistment of suitably-qualified former enlisted members of the Defence Forces to fill certain positions.
The intention is that this provision will be used to enlist suitably-qualified former enlisted persons in the PDF to fill certain positions. Any person enlisted under this section will have particular skills and expertise required by the Defence Forces which cannot be met through the use of existing military resources.
Persons enlisted under this section will be enlisted for a specified period and for a specified purpose (involving the use of a particular skill or area or expertise) and will not be subject to the normal service requirements which apply to persons enlisted under section 53. In addition, any person enlisted under this section will be required to meet general eligibility criteria (including in relation to physical fitness) to ensure that he or she will be capable of performing normal military duties (including, if necessary, in relation to overseas service).
C. This Bill contains a amendment being amended to provide for a application that is submitted relating to application for an extension of time to bring forward an appeal for a summary court martial provided any such application is brought before the end of the “initial period”.
There will now be no requirement on the summary court-martial to be available to consider the application for an extension before the end of the “initial period” (that is, the summary court-martial will have the flexibility to consider the application and issue a decision after the expiry of the “initial period”).
D. This Bill also includes a series of amendments to remove the references in the Defence Act to the enlistment of persons under the age of 18 as the Defence Act still contains references to the enlistment of minors.
Wed, 9 Sep 2020
Defence (Amendment) Bill 2020 In Dáil Éireann
As above
Thu, 10 Sep 2020
Ministers and Ministers of State (Successors) Bill 2020 In Dáil Éireann
Sponsored by: Peadar Tóibín (Aontú)
Source: Private Member
Originating House: Dáil Éireann
Official Description :
Bill entitled an Act to ensure the prompt appointment of successors to Ministers and Ministers of State who have as a result of a general election ceased to be members of the Oireachtas; and to provide for related matters.
Expanded Description :
Constitutionally Ministers must be Oireachtas members, as must Ministers of State. However, Ministers and Ministers of State who have ceased to be members of the Oireachtas continue to act for a period of time as Minister until they are replaced.
The purpose of this Bill is to ensure the prompt appointment of successors to those Ministers and Ministers of State who have, as a result of a general election, ceased to be Oireachtas members.
In particular the Bill seeks to more promptly reflect the outcome of a general election and bring the composition of Government into alignment with Article 28.7 of the Constitution.
This Bill requires the Taoiseach to nominate successors to Ministers and Ministers of State who have ceased to be members of a House of the Oireachtas. This duty applies equally to a Taoiseach who is continuing to carry on his or her duties pursuant to Article 28.11 of the Constitution. Persons appointed by a Taoiseach in such circumstances will not necessarily occupy Ministerial office in the Government which will subsequently be formed.
However, they will be in a position to assist the caretaker Government as members of that Government and they will be persons with a current mandate, because pursuant to Article 28.7 of the Constitution and section 1(1) of the Act of 1977 they will be Oireachtas members.
Taoiseach’s duties under it must be performed on or before “the specified date”. For all future general elections, that date is six weeks after the general election.
This timeframe has regard for the requirement in Article 16.4.2° of the Constitution that Dáil Éireann “shall meet within 30 days from” the general election polling day. In respect of the last general election, “the specified date” by which the duties under Section 3 must be performed is the date that is seven days after the passing of the Bill.
This timeframe is short because of the following factors:
1) the time that has already passed since the last general election;
2) the additional time which the Bill is likely to take in going through the legislative process;
3) the reality that, since there will be a newly appointed Taoiseach prior to passing of the Bill, there is a high degree of probability that the newly appointed Taoiseach will be able to carry out the duties imposed by Section 3 of the Bill before the Bill is passed.
Consequently, with respect to the last general election, Section 3 of the Bill will apply only if the duties imposed by it have not been carried out prior to passing of the Bill. It will of course apply with respect to future general elections.
This Bill will make it so that instead of the appointment of a Minister of State ending only on the appointment of the Taoiseach’s successor, the appointment of a Minister of State will end on either the appointment of the Taoiseach’s successor or the appointment of the successor to the Minister of State concerned (whichever happens first).
This Bill can be read about here, from the meath chronical
Or here from the Irish examiner
Apologies for not making as much of these posts as I would like to, has been a busy time for me
Thanks for reading tho : )
Also I made a Subreddit called Oireachtas that just has the weekly posts i have made if anyone wants to go through them, I intend to use it as a archive for these posts.Link to it here Oireachtas
submitted by PlasticCoffee to irishpolitics [link] [comments]


2020.09.07 07:36 PlasticCoffee Bills scheduled for discussion in Dáil Éireann from the 7th of September 2020 till the 13th of September 2020.

Bills scheduled for discussion in Dáil Éireann from the 7th of September 2020 till the 13th of September 2020.
This information was found on oireachtas.ie the official government website for the Government, Oireachtas.ie does say that the schedule is subject to change at short notice.
A lot of the descriptions are in legalese and they reference legal statutes and other laws, but these descriptions are from oireachtas.ie. If you follow the link you can also find a link to the bills in question themselves.
Let me know if you think this could be done better.
Bills scheduled for discussion
Subject to change at short notice
Tue, 8 Sep 2020
Defence (Amendment) Bill 2020 In Dáil Éireann
Sponsored by: Minister for Defence, Simon Coveney (FG)
Source: Government
Originating House: Dáil Éireann
Official Description :
Bill entitled an Act to amend the Defence Act 1954 and the Defence (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1979; and to provide for related matters.
Expanded Description :
This Bill (Insertion of new section 17A in Principal Act) inserts a new section (section 17A) into the Defence Act 1954 to permit the delegation by the Minister for Defence of a limited degree of control and authority over a Defence Forces contingent (referred to as ‘operational control’ in this amendment) deployed as part of an international force to the Force Commander of that force. The amendment will not alter the current command structure within the Irish Defence Forces but merely underpins current practice in relation to day to day operational control of contingents of the Permanent Defence Force (PDF) engaged in international operations.
A. The amendment provides that a delegation of operational control by the Minister for Defence to the Force Commander will be in writing and may be subject to such exceptions and limitations as the Minister may determine, having had regard to such requirements as are necessary for the efficient operation of the mission concerned. Any delegation of operational control will provide as follows:
(i) in so far as is necessary to ensure the efficient operation of a mission, provide that each member of the Defence Forces assigned to an international force led by a Force Commander shall comply with every lawful order issued to him or her by a member of the international force in his or her military chain of command, subject to any exclusions as may be specified in the written delegation;
(ii) provide that the military police component of the international force under the authority of the Force Commander may arrest and detain a member of the Defence Forces provided such member is handed over as soon as possible to the Irish contingent commander or the designated senior Irish officer;
(iii) provide that each member of the Defence Forces in respect of whom a delegation of operational control is made shall cooperate with the military police component of the international force;
(iv) include any other ancillary provisions in relation to the delegation of operational control as the Minister may deem to be necessary for the efficient operation of the mission to which the delegation refers.
B. This Bill includes a number of amendments to the Defence Act 1954 to facilitate the re-enlistment of suitably-qualified former enlisted members of the Defence Forces to fill certain positions.
The intention is that this provision will be used to enlist suitably-qualified former enlisted persons in the PDF to fill certain positions. Any person enlisted under this section will have particular skills and expertise required by the Defence Forces which cannot be met through the use of existing military resources.
Persons enlisted under this section will be enlisted for a specified period and for a specified purpose (involving the use of a particular skill or area or expertise) and will not be subject to the normal service requirements which apply to persons enlisted under section 53. In addition, any person enlisted under this section will be required to meet general eligibility criteria (including in relation to physical fitness) to ensure that he or she will be capable of performing normal military duties (including, if necessary, in relation to overseas service).
C. This Bill contains a amendment being amended to provide for a application that is submitted relating to application for an extension of time to bring forward an appeal for a summary cour martial provided any such application is broug before the end of the “initial period”.
There will now be no requirement on the summary court-martial to be available to consider the application for an extension before the end of the “initial period” (that is, the summary court-martial will have the flexibility to consider the application and issue a decision after the expiry of the “initial period”).
D. This Bill also includes a series of amendments to remove the references in the Defence Act to the enlistment of persons under the age of 18 as the Defence Act still contains references to the enlistment of minors.
Wed, 9 Sep 2020
Defence (Amendment) Bill 2020 In Dáil Éireann
As above
Thu, 10 Sep 2020
Ministers and Ministers of State (Successors) Bill 2020 In Dáil Éireann
Sponsored by: Peadar Tóibín (Aontú)
Source: Private Member
Originating House: Dáil Éireann
Official Description :
Bill entitled an Act to ensure the prompt appointment of successors to Ministers and Ministers of State who have as a result of a general election ceased to be members of the Oireachtas; and to provide for related matters.
Expanded Description :
Constitutionally Ministers must be Oireachtas members, as must Ministers of State. However, Ministers and Ministers of State who have ceased to be members of the Oireachtas continue to act for a period of time as Minister until they are replaced.
The purpose of this Bill is to ensure the prompt appointment of successors to those Ministers and Ministers of State who have, as a result of a general election, ceased to be Oireachtas members.
In particular the Bill seeks to more promptly reflect the outcome of a general election and bring the composition of Government into alignment with Article 28.7 of the Constitution.
This Bill requires the Taoiseach to nominate successors to Ministers and Ministers of State who have ceased to be members of a House of the Oireachtas. This duty applies equally to a Taoiseach who is continuing to carry on his or her duties pursuant to Article 28.11 of the Constitution. Persons appointed by a Taoiseach in such circumstances will not necessarily occupy Ministerial office in the Government which will subsequently be formed.
However, they will be in a position to assist the caretaker Government as members of that Government and they will be persons with a current mandate, because pursuant to Article 28.7 of the Constitution and section 1(1) of the Act of 1977 they will be Oireachtas members.
Taoiseach’s duties under it must be performed on or before “the specified date”. For all future general elections, that date is six weeks after the general election.
This timeframe has regard for the requirement in Article 16.4.2° of the Constitution that Dáil Éireann “shall meet within 30 days from” the general election polling day. In respect of the last general election, “the specified date” by which the duties under Section 3 must be performed is the date that is seven days after the passing of the Bill.
This timeframe is short because of the following factors:
1) the time that has already passed since the last general election;
2) the additional time which the Bill is likely to take in going through the legislative process;
3) the reality that, since there will be a newly appointed Taoiseach prior to passing of the Bill, there is a high degree of probability that the newly appointed Taoiseach will be able to carry out the duties imposed by Section 3 of the Bill before the Bill is passed.
Consequently, with respect to the last general election, Section 3 of the Bill will apply only if the duties imposed by it have not been carried out prior to passing of the Bill. It will of course apply with respect to future general elections.
This Bill will make it so that instead of the appointment of a Minister of State ending only on the appointment of the Taoiseach’s successor, the appointment of a Minister of State will end on either the appointment of the Taoiseach’s successor or the appointment of the successor to the Minister of State concerned (whichever happens first).
This Bill can be read about here, from the meath chronical
Or here from the Irish examiner
Apologies for not making as much of these posts as I would like to, has been a busy time for me
Thanks for reading tho : )
Also I made a Subreddit called Oireachtas that just has the weekly posts i have made if anyone wants to go through them, I intend to use it as a archive for these posts.Link to it here Oireachtas
submitted by PlasticCoffee to Oireachtas [link] [comments]


2020.09.03 14:06 NeatSaucer [Aoraki - Post 4 - 04 September] NeatSaucer is seen answering questions from people in an interaction with Radio Aoraki.

NeatSaucer finishes distributing pamphlets to members of the community in Blenheim and then begins a drive to the Radio Station of Radio Aoraki located in Aoraki/Mount Cook. After a tiring drive and a little assistance from the residents, NeatSaucer reaches the Radio Station and after a sip of water, the Radio Host VJ Sissy introduces the Minister and begins her daily show where she takes questions from the Public and have MPs answer them.
VJ Sissy (S) : Hello and welcome to Radio Aoraki, today we have Infrastructure Minister, List Member of Parliament from the Greens and our candidate for the Aoraki seat, NeatSaucer. Hello mam!
NeatSaucer (N): Hey, hope your day is well. I am pleasured to join you in your interview.
S: So now, we will be taking questions from our twitter and facebook pages and you have to answer them. The first one is from harook_zik1457 and asks, "Why do you wish to contest in Aoraki this time"
N: So yes, thank you for that lovely question. Why Aoraki, is a question many within my Party and the rest of the public asked when I stood for elections in this seat. Aoraki has always been a place that has been close to my heart because we used to live in here until I grew to my teenage, and a lot of my memories are attached closely to this place. I am indeed privileged to contest here and to represent the pleasant and really sweet, kind hearted people of Aoraki, and being the torch of difference Aoraki can see only if it elected a Green as its Member. Aoraki is an extremely beautiful place, with the gifts of Nature and I think protecting nature is the first instinct of a Green, and that serves as a reason for why should we be elected and why did I contest for the seat.
S: Moving to the second one, it is from LoLBuzz_:) and asks, "Your Maori Affairs Minister was indeed not active over the last two terms, then why should a Maori vote for you?"
N: I appreciate that someone has finally risen to ask this question with respect to our Maori Affairs focus as such. The first factor is that our Ministers have always been hard at work trying to bring in the best solution possible to the problems faced by our Maori community and providing true change rather than sitting like the Nationals Candidates who propose but bring nothing on the table. Now, with this perception cleared, let me list you some of our core pledges as a Greens Member on why should you vote for us. The first is on Te Triti O Waitangi. We are one of the only candidates in the Aoraki race who have stood up and said the Maori version should be recognized, and that is one unique aspect. One directly from our coalition agreement, that is "strengthening legal provisions to ensure that at-risk tamariki stay with whānau", another being our commitment to signing the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. So these are some of our many policies for a Maori.
S: That was indeed something which all those wanting to not vote for you because of that reason should be taking note and the next one is from h1457 and asks, "What has the Alliance Government done till now, we only see PMs getting kicked out and non cooperation of ministers?"
N: Answering this question, I assume the person has seen the poster from my Nationals Candidate who put up a poster with the tagline mentioned about non cooperation and things, so if that being the case, I would call the people to not believe in the trash put in that poster. Coming to what we have done, it may sound a bit of boasting but let me list out some of our achievements till date, the first being fulfilling over a vast majority of our promises in the Coalition Agreement unlike some who call us not fulfilling, we have fulfilled a lot of our commitments and on the lot, we have done a multiple aspects of the agreement, which includes the refugee quota increase, residential programme extension and reform, joining the Vision Zero Serious Road Accidents and Deaths plan and bringing it to effect by 2030. Our Budget was one that brought in multiple and sweeping changes to be frank with you and so the assumptions made are frankly wrong and I would urge you to see this side of the coin as well.
S: Moving on to the next one is from sfgsdge1 and asks, "As a Foreign Policy Analyst, can you provide me reasons with why should I vote a Green?"
N: Oh yeah, thank you sfgsdge1 for that question, and indeed I think any foreign policy expert would agree with my assumption that our Government has indeed been one with a very concrete and farsighted foreign policy. The first being with one of our commitments and something that is ongoing, the ratification of the PACER Plus Agreement. The PACER Plus Agreement is one with immense Foreign Policy value and promotes increased trade and commerce with these regions, thereby providing another platform to increase our relations. Our next step is probably something more culture oriented, that is working to establish a Pacific Heritage Museum and a new Language Unit on that front which will be promoting these cultures further. We have also committed to giving a firm standing across the globe that we need democracy and taking due action against those blocking human rights. Our track record has also been pretty much foreign policy oriented at a lot of spots, whether be it solving the Minerva Reefs issue or supporting international climate action, the Greens have always and will always be a Party with sensible approach to our Foreign Policy as a country.
S: We will now move on to the next question, this one is from boomer170 and asks, "As Infra Minister, can you tell me what you have done and why should we vote for you on basis of Infra?"
N: Yes, so let's answer this question. Our Coalition Agreement has indeed been very broad and provides for a lot of scope with respect to Infrastructure and what should be accomplished by myself as Infrastructure Minister. So the first, I have finally got New Zealand to take part in this global project which has an aim to reform the Highways Systems to ensure that there exists zero serious road accident injuries and deaths at all times, which is called Vision Zero. New Zealand will have its plan for it ready in 2021 and we will be bringing the project implementation in the year 2030. The next issue is with respect to 5G, I have released a Ministerial Statement with respect to the safety and implementation of 5G which means we will be getting 5G soon. The next is with respect to cyber-security infrastructure, I am working with other ministers to see and get a legislation on it soon, and the Urban Planning Guidance and a Regional Development Corporation, on these fronts, I am in progress with both being ready which means within sometime you can expect them. All of this proves the commitment of the Greens and therefore reasons why should you vote for us in Aoraki.
NeatSaucer then continues answering around five more questions in the interview and then VJ Sissy concludes the interview with the Minister leaving after bidding adieu to have lunch at a friends' place and then continue her long day of campaigning.
submitted by NeatSaucer to MNZByElection [link] [comments]


2020.09.03 03:34 SpikeRaynor Reflections on my JW experience from a former elder

Long post, conclusion at the bottom.
Every now and then, I reflect on things I missed out on as Jehovah’s Witness, and because of being in a dysfunctional family. I just opened up my high school yearbook. I was baptized at 11, and super PIMI at the time, though physics class almost woke me up. I look through my yearbook, filled with messages and signatures and phone numbers of the people that at the time I considered to be in another world. I had lots of friends in high school, despite the fact I never did anything outside of school with them. They tried to invite me too. I turned down an invitation to the prom from a really nice girl. This despite the fact I’m not the greatest looking guy.
My path would take me through a 4 year degree in Mechanical Engineering (I went to college from 1995-1999 when it wasn’t totally crushed, just mildly looked down on). After graduation, I pioneered for a year while taking 1 graduate class per semester, and working part time as an engineer. I would become a Ministerial Servant, then later an Elder, and continue my career as a Mechanical Engineer in the medical device field. My accomplishments increased, both professionally and in the congregation. I became COBE at a young age, and went to Elder school at Patterson Bethel. Why did this happen?
I have figured out why I could live in two worlds at the same time, pretending one was fake, and thus not actually living there, while living fully in the other (JW land). My dysfunctional family is truly the thing that kept me indoctrinated. I have realized that to me, I lost parental figures early on, and literally endured a family life that I couldn’t stand. I have also realized that this isn’t because my parents set out to create such a dysfunctional situation, they just were so damaged or incapable themselves, there was nothing else that could have happened.
As I read the memories of one of my high school friends that I now wish I had dated, it sinks in deeply. She said “thanks dad for making me laugh and thanks mom for always being right.” I was the one who made my dad laugh, and I couldn’t go to my mother about anything because her only reaction was to flip out and get angry and yell. Sadly, I have little doubt that my mother loved me every bit as much as my high school friend’s mother loved her. Love wasn’t the problem. But that isn’t easy to understand when you are raised to think your family is normal.
What I’ve realized is that the Watchtower is really good at recruiting people that have big problems. Enter my family. My mother was recruited because of her problems and family problems. The Watchtower didn’t make my family better. It probably magnified, or at least prolonged the problems. In this boiling cauldron of turbulence, I was raised.
One benefit I do have coming from my family is intelligence. Both of my parents are fairly intelligent, and I inherited that ability, and a natural curiosity. That and my mother did insist that I attend college. Good thing she did, because I was indoctrinated enough to think of doing something more along the lines of JWs. But, during college, my father became an alcoholic. He was briefly a JW, but had disassociated by the time I was 17. I commuted from home while I was in college, to avoid the “worldly” atmosphere at college. But, this meant that I was still living in my dysfunctional family that I had wanted to leave since I was 12. This made focusing at school hard. My 4 years were lackluster since I was unfocused and distracted. None the less, I graduated with a degree in Mechanical Engineering in 4 years. My career has had its ups and downs. I have reached heights in my career that not everyone reaches, mostly through hard work and through my willingness to take ownership. I have tried to share those skills with others so they too may have success.
Anyway, looking back, I realize that the sole reason that I remained as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses for so long was because of how dysfunctional my family was. The Jehovah’s Witnesses became my family. Meanwhile, I would end up becoming the parental figure to my mother, and my father would become a recluse and an on and off drunk. He once called my while drunk and confessed that he didn’t hate me anymore. I wasn’t sure whether I cared.
So now I look back and constantly try to process the past. I have my older brother back, he left more than a decade before I did, and he accepted me when I left. I got my mother out, so no more family in the JWs. I make good money, drive a nice car, and have great friends. I’m in my early 40’s, divorced with no kids and wondering whether I’ll ever have a family of my own since I am currently single. Despite all that, I’d rather be where I am than back in the cult. I can now process my life and come to terms with it. That wasn’t possible in the cult. Tomorrow can always be better, I don’t need to wait for Jehovah to intervene.
My plan is to move forward. I look into the past as a way of coming to terms with the present. I see what might have been. I suppose that should give me confidence for what could be. The loss hurts. Bad. But, moving forward things will be better. I suppose it is therapeutic to write about one’s past, as most of us probably have things to come to terms with.
When people wake up, I always recommend counseling. To some extent, I had some. Life gets better after leaving, and mine is. While there are always ups and downs, every now and then I allow myself to peer into the past. Sometimes you need to allow yourself to experience and feel your pain to move forward. Perhaps I haven’t yet accepted all of mine. The best place to be is where you have crossed that point.
While those of us who have left have our issues to work through, one thing that is universally true is that life is better on the outside than trapped inside. Life holds many possibilities. I suppose that I shared my story both for myself, and in the hopes that it helps someone else. I have shared my story before, but not all the parts of it. It isn’t easy to discuss things that might be damaging to family members should they stumble across the information. I don’t think that is an issue here, which is why I’m telling more of my story.
Conclusion: life is much better after leaving Jehovah's Witnesses, the sooner you do, the better.
submitted by SpikeRaynor to exjw [link] [comments]


2020.08.31 19:01 fiftythreestudio Let's talk about why California - and, particularly, LA - has such a bad housing shortage.

In this excellent post from a few years back, clipstep discussed the building code and financial reasons why LA only seems to build luxury condos. I'm going to talk about the legal reasons why this is so. As always, this is not legal advice. Please hire an attorney if you have individual zoning questions.
Bottom-line, up front: LA land use laws are so restrictive and bureaucratic that it's not financially possible to build small, no-frills apartment buildings anymore like we did in the past.
I'll start by talking about how our zoning laws work, and then go into why LA zoning law makes it impossible to build non-luxury apartments.
How zoning laws work
Let's start by talking about how the law works. Every piece of land has a zoning designation, which specifies what is and isn't legal to build on a piece of land. LA City has a comprehensive zoning map if you want to peruse it. If you want to build something new that isn't allowed by the zoning code, you're going to have to go to City Hall, to get a zoning variance - that is, a special permit to build something other than what's explicitly allowed by law. The City Council is under no obligation to grant you a variance, and if you don't grease palms you're likely to get shot down. This is in addition to the exhaustive review required under the California Environmental Quality Act that I discussed previously.
Keep this in mind while I take you on a short tour of LA's zoning law.
Pre-1960s zoning law
LA was designed to be sprawling from the very beginning. In 1904, the City Council put a height limit of 150 feet (~13 stories) on the city - in a period when NYC and Chicago had already gotten to 400 feet (30 stories). This was designed to prevent "the undue concentration of traffic," as a 1925 County report put it. Same for residential zoning, which had setback requirements to encourage single-family construction. This is why LA doesn't have rowhouse neighborhoods like you see in SF, NYC or Philadelphia, even though most of LA was laid out during the Red Car era.
In the olden days, the intensity of development tended to match the value of the land. I'll illustrate by starting in DTLA and going west. This is 6th and Broadway, in the Historic Core, with a mix of skyscrapers and mid-rise commercial space; go outbound a few miles to 3rd and New Hampshire in Koreatown and it's all lots of small, low-slung apartment buildings; by Miracle Mile you start seeing a bunch of single family homes interspersed with the apartments; keep going three miles further out to Cheviot Hills and it's all recognizably suburban and single-family. Back in the day, out of date single-family homes would gradually be torn down and replaced with apartments, or they'd be cut up into apartments, like on old Bunker Hill.
This kind of semi-organic development was normal until the 1960s. But then a pretty dramatic shift happened: LA was growing so quickly, and land values were rising so fast, that lots of small apartment buildings started popping up in single-family residential neighborhoods, especially on the Westside. This is where zoning laws started to get really restrictive.
The changes of the late '60s through '90s
The small apartment buildings that triggered this revolt are called are called dingbats. They're those boxy buildings you see all over the place with pompous names like "La Traviata" or "Chateau Antoinette". These kinds of housing weren't pretty - but they were no-frills apartments you could afford if you were an actor, or a grocery clerk, or a secretary. This scared the hell out of homeowners in rich neighborhoods, because apartments were for poor people and minorities. So, we voted for politicians who reduced the zoning of LA bit by bit, effectively freezing the status quo in place. And after 1970, rich communities just stopped building new housing, period. You can see the results from the population table below.
City 1970 population 2019 population
Beverly Hills 33,416 33,792
Manhattan Beach 35,352 35,183
San Marino 14,177 13,048
Santa Monica 88,289 90,401
South Pasadena 22,979 25,329
Even in LA City the reduction in capacity was really drastic. In 1960, LA City, population 2.5 million, had a zoning code that allowed for 10 million inhabitants worth of housing. By 2010, LA City, population 4 million, had a zoning code that allowed for 4.3 million inhabitants - and about 75% of LA City's land was reserved for single-family homes only. Existing apartment buildings are grandfathered in, but it's not legal to build new ones.
Why the zoning laws make it impossible to build small non-luxury apartments
These restrictive zoning changes mean that small, cheap apartment buildings are largely off-limits today. It simply makes no sense to spend $150,000 on environmental review, hire lawyers to get a variance, and get into a years-long fight with the city council to build 6 measly apartments. You have to build big, or go home. Big, politically-connected developers can do that, because these bureaucratic and legal costs are already built in to their business model. Large corporate developers can spread the costs of attorneys and political wrangling across a few dozen or a few hundred mid-rise apartments, especially if you aim it at the luxury market.
But there's just no good legal way to build simple no-frills apartments anymore, because it's so much hassle and expense to get them approved. It's not a technological problem - it's a legal and political one.
So how do we fix this?
There's a good bill in the state legislature which would rezone all single-family parcels for four units, eliminate minimum parking requirements near transit, exempt these small apartments from environmental review, and provide for automatic approval so the City Council and the neighbors can't meddle. If it meets the building code, your project gets approved, period. The Legislature did this already with granny flats and backyard cottages, as well as with certain types of affordable housing, and it's dramatically sped up the process of approving new construction. Doing the same for small apartment buildings would make it financially possible to build non-luxury apartments again, because it means way less money spent on lawyers and more money for building.
EDIT: a lot of people have asked just why the environmental review exception matters. The reason is that the California Environmental Quality Act puts all new projects through the same level of exhaustive review, so a four-unit apartment building is subject to the same level of scrutiny as (say) an oil refinery. Preparing one is extremely expensive, and the neighbors love to litigate the environmental impact report. This often makes it impossible to build smaller non-luxury buildings. If you want to see what environmental review looks like, here's a pretty standard environmental impact report from a 248-unit complex in Torrance.
x-posted from /losangeles.
submitted by fiftythreestudio to lostsubways [link] [comments]


2020.08.30 04:07 PIMOWarrior Elitist mate selection

I'm so ashamed to admit to this...when I was in Bethel, the vast majority of us were pretty adamant that we would never date a girl who wasn't pioneering. How disgusting.
Eventually, I changed my viewpoint even while still serving there. But I can't help but think now how idiotic that was.
A related story: one of my friends got married and revealed to me that his wife had previously decided she would only marry a ministerial servant. However, eventually she decided nothing less than an elder would be acceptable.
The spiritual elitism is real, friends.
submitted by PIMOWarrior to exjw [link] [comments]


2020.08.28 23:25 taisho_roman Japanese Leadership Post-Abe - A Rundown of Potential Candidates, Factions, and Powerbrokers

In light of the announcement that Abe Shinzo will be resigning as Prime Minister of Japan, I wanted to try my best to provide a broad rundown of who the major players will be in the election of the next president of the Liberal Democratic Party, and by extension the next Prime Minister of Japan. Information on Japanese politics can be hard to come by for those who don't read Japanese, and what is available is often horribly outdated or poorly presented, and I've found that the internal dynamics of the LDP can be especially confusing.
"Post-Abe" is a subject which has rarely been far from the front pages of Japanese media in recent months, even before Abe's health issues began to cause serious concern. Abe's unprecedented third term as party president was set to expire a year from now, and neither he nor the party leadership had any intention of further amending party rules to allow him a fourth term. Abe's incredibly steady leadership was based in large part on an impression that there was no other obvious leader - opinion polls of those who supported the Cabinet have routinely listed "there isn't anybody better" as the number one reason given. Now that he is resigning, the complicated and contentious internal politics that have characterized the LDP since its inception might very well be set to return in full force.
Next week the exact parameters of the LDP presidential election will be determined - namely whether it will be done through the ordinary procedure, involving a vote of the party’s more than one million rank-and-file members, or through a restricted, expedited process limiting the vote to only the LDP Diet members and a handful of representatives from each prefectural party branch (about 500-600 people total). In either case, a runoff will also be held if no one candidate receives a majority of votes. Additionally, in order to stand as a candidate, an LDP member must first be nominated by at least 20 LDP members of the Diet.
For those completely unfamiliar with the LDP's factions, please note that factions are not formed around ideological lines. There is a secondary policy component, and a faction may have a general political leaning, but policy is not the fundamental distinguishing element and it is not unusual to have faction members with widely divergent views. Factions are centered on individual, influential senior politicians, who lend their influence and financial support to their junior faction members, and moreover the factions survive their members - when a faction leader retires or loses reelection, leadership is inherited by another member. Most factions today have histories dating back to the founding of the LDP, and at any time a faction has two names - its "official" name, and the name of its current leader (e.g. "the Aso Faction," run by Aso Taro).
So for anyone who might be interested in learning more about the opening volleys of Post-Abe Japanese politics, I have done my best here to list out who I think the key personalities will be in the coming weeks, organized by their formal factional affiliation. Hopefully this can be somewhat informative, but I apologize if anything is unclear or comes across as particularly misguided or biased.
Suigetsukai (Ishiba Faction)
Ishiba Shigeru
Along with Kishida Fumio, former LDP Secretary-General and prominent party veteran Ishiba Shigeru is one of the two people most likely to succeed Abe as Prime Minister (excluding the significant possibility of an interim premiership by Deputy Prime Minister Aso Taro). Ishiba’s greatest asset is arguably his mix of popularity within the party and popularity with the general public – a balance that is exceedingly rare among prominent LDP members, for whom the two tend to be mutually exclusive. He routinely tops opinion polls of preferred future Prime Ministers, and has especially strong connections with regional LDP branches. These nationwide relationships lead some to see him as the most “prime ministerial” option in the sense of his being well suited to becoming the national face of the party.
His somewhat antagonistic relationship with Abe has hampered his ambitions thus far, and may continue to do so - for Abe's inner circle, Ishiba is likely their last choice for Prime Minister. But for several years now he has extensively courted many of the party’s smaller factions, which supported his unsuccessful but highly-publicized 2018 bid to unseat Abe as party leader. Since 2018 he has been fairly meticulous in maintaining this support network in anticipation of establishing himself as the early frontrunner for the 2021 leadership election, and so is one of the candidates best equipped to respond to Abe’s sudden resignation.
Kouchikai (Kishida Faction)
Kishida Fumio
A few years ago, former Foreign Minister and current chairman of the LDP Policy Research Council Kishida Fumio would have been widely seen as Abe’s guaranteed successor. Even as recently as last year, Abe himself has expressed the belief that Kishida was the one most likely to be the next Prime Minister.
Despite once being the favored successor of Abe’s inner circle, Kishida’s stature has been on the decline and is increasingly seen by some as a liability. His low-key public profile, lacking in both popularity and controversy, once an asset in the midst of a conga line of Cabinet scandals, is now a significant problem as poll after poll shows him lagging far behind Ishiba in popular support. Many in the Cabinet have also criticized his cautious and evenhanded political style as unsuited to properly grapple with COVID and severe economic contraction (Aso was recently quoted as saying “Kishida is for peacetime” when discussing candidates to succeed Abe).
But while he cuts a weaker figure in the party now, he has, after Ishiba, certainly been laying the most groundwork for a shot at the premiership, and most recently he has been making efforts to salvage his support among Abe’s inner circle, working particularly closely with former Economy Minister Amari Akira, a close confidant of Abe’s and an influential member of the Aso Faction. If Abe openly reaffirms his support for Kishida as his successor, he will likely face reduced competition and have much better odds of beating Ishiba in a head-to-head contest.
Shikoukai (Aso Faction)
Aso Taro and Kono Taro
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister, Aso Taro briefly served as Prime Minister after Abe resigned in 2007. One of the LDP’s most influential internal powerbrokers and a close confidant of Abe’s. Chronically controversial and scandal-ridden, and generally appears more interested in the prospect of selecting the next Prime Minister than in serving as Prime Minister again himself, especially given his advanced age. The faction he leads is the second-largest in the party, behind Abe’s Hosoda Faction. In the interest of a relatively quick and smooth transition, it is possible that party members may opt to temporarily avoid a potentially fractious and competitive process and rally around Aso as an interim caretaker leader, likely serving no longer than the remainder of Abe’s term into 2021. Aso becoming Prime Minister would likely also mean a snap lower house election in the Fall, something Aso himself has been recently pushing for, after which the party would begin its internal struggle over the post-Abe future in earnest. This arrangement would likely appeal to candidates other than Ishiba and Kishida who are comparatively unprepared to contest the party presidency. If Aso himself declines or is not considered for an interim premiership, he will automatically become arguably the second most-important kingmaker in this process, after Abe himself.
Current Defense Minister and former Foreign Minister Kono Taro is prospectively the Aso faction’s second-best candidate for the premiership, and unlike his faction leader benefits from widespread public popularity – he generally ranks second behind Ishiba in public opinion polls for preferred Abe successors, and is often seen as honest, transparent, highly capable, and an engaging public speaker. Kono has previously made his intent to contest the party leadership clear, but despite his popularity he is unlikely to gain much traction unless either Aso throws his full weight behind him or the leadership selection goes to a vote of the general party membership. For whatever his popularity with voters, he has been a perpetual headache for many party leaders, seen internally as more of an irresponsible maverick, excessively stubborn and prone to making major snap decisions without consulting others.
Aso has thus far made no public suggestion that he would support Kono in a bid for the premiership, and is rumored to be leaning instead towards a potential sponsorship of current Foreign Minister Motegi.
Seiwakai (Hosoda Faction)
Inada Tomomi, Shimomura Hakubun, and Nishimura Yasutoshi
While the Hosoda Faction, which Abe himself belongs to, is by far the largest within the party with nearly 100 Diet members, it is unlikely that his successor will come from the faction itself. The main factional players in the selection process are likely to be Shimomura Hakubun, Inada Tomomi, and Nishimura Yasutoshi, although none have anything resembling decisive influence over the sprawling faction membership. More probable is the possibility that Abe himself may attempt to leverage the faction in support of a favored successor, in which case any potential aspirations by these three would be greatly reduced.
The current LDP Acting Secretary-General and former Defense Minister, Inada is an Abe protégé who was at one point seen as among his favored potential successors. She briefly dropped out of the public eye and out of Abe’s favor in 2017 after a series of scandals and controversial statements led to her resignation from the Cabinet. A year later she returned from the political wilderness to publicly chastise perennial party-hopper and general nuisance Sugita Mio for her inflammatory comments about LGBTQ Japanese, and has since then largely rebranded from her previous niche as a foreign policy hawk to more of a spokeswoman for the party’s socially liberal wing. She had indicated plans to run for party leadership after Abe’s term expired in 2021, but may not opt to accelerate her plans in light of his early resignation.
LDP Strategy Chief and former Education Minister, Shimomura is mostly remembered for his 2015 resignation over the skyrocketing costs of the 2020 Olympics preparations. In contrast to Aso, he has publicly opposed a snap election in the Fall, and unlike Inada has resisted any discussion of his post-Abe political ambitions, but has nevertheless has spent the past several years cultivating influence within the Hosoda Faction. His entry into the race will hinge on the extent to which he is able to either collaborate with (more likely Inada) or outmaneuver (more likely Nishimura) the other major factional players to secure his internal influence. It is unlikely he would openly compete against either of them for the premiership without first being certain that he would be able to rally the faction behind him.
Current Economy Minister Nishimura has in recent years been a relative unknown compared to Inada and Shimomura, having only recently risen to public prominence as the Cabinet’s de facto frontman on COVID response measures. It is difficult to evaluate his prospects as a future prime minister given that he would not have crossed most people’s minds for the position six months ago, but any public moves by him are worth watching given the relative power vacuum in the Hosoda Faction.
Inada and Shimomura had recently jointly launched a focus group to consider post-COVID (and, by implication, post-Abe) policy direction, in what is seemingly a bid to steer the future of the Hosoda Faction, which has no clear post-Abe leadership. If no Hosoda Faction member emerges as a serious contender for the party presidency and Abe either declines or fails to push the faction behind another candidate, these two may emerge as the faction’s de facto powerbrokers. Their alignment with other factions’ candidates is somewhat uncertain, but it is worth noting that Shimomura has emphasized that his and Inada’s Post-COVID policy group hopes to “synergize” with the similar group launched separately by Kishida.
Shisuikai (Nikai Faction)
Nikai Toshihiro
The secretary-general of the LDP, who has been entrusted by Abe with arranging and overseeing the election of his successor. He will ultimately decide how the presidential election takes place – whether through a general membership vote or a limited vote. A limited vote, which is reserved for irregular leadership selections following mid-term resignations such as this, is probably more likely, but Nikai has floated the possibility of going through with a general membership vote.
On top of the fact that he is 81 and is not going to be participating in the election himself, his faction has no prominent potential candidates. The closest might be former Economy Minister Hayashi Moto, who is a dark horse at best and is likely not even considering entering the race. The Nikai Faction has historically been supportive of prolonging the Abe Administration as long as possible (Hayashi himself once encouraged Abe to consider a fourth term), and to that end has previously run interference against the Kishida Faction’s post-Abe succession plans. While Nikai himself is influential, he is at the tail end of his career and the faction is lacking in prominent players to succeed him, so it’s not surprising if they come across as a bit skittish about declining in influence in the post-Abe era. So with Abe definitively on his way out, Nikai likely has his eye out for deals that can prevent the faction from being entirely sidelined. The most likely target seems to be Chief Cabinet Secretary Suga, who is not a faction member and who has an exceptionally positive relationship with Nikai. If Suga does participate as a candidate, odds seem high that Nikai would back him. If Suga does not participate, watch for a potential deal between Suga and Nikai to jointly back another candidate – likely not anyone in the orbit of the Hosoda or Aso factions, but rather someone like Kishida or Ishiba who lead a minor faction. Both Kishida and Ishiba know this, and have been accordingly courting Nikai for some time now.
Heiseiken (Takeshita Faction)
Motegi Toshimitsu, Kato Katsunobu, and Obuchi Yuko
A relatively recent addition to the “Post-Abe” media speculation shortlist, Foreign Minister Motegi has in past months earned significant praise for his talent in the role from Abe himself and, even moreso, from Aso, who has seemingly been considering backing him as the next Prime Minister. For Abe, the highly capable Motegi would match well with his stated preference for a successor who has “grown into” the role, rather than having been groomed for it. However, support from either Abe or Aso would be critical for Motegi, who is unlikely to receive backing from his own faction. There has been deep friction between him and key leadership in the Takeshita Faction after he effectively triggered a split in the faction during the 2018 LDP leadership election by championing Abe’s re-election when other faction leaders had supported Ishiba.
Were Motegi to pursue party leadership, faction leaders may specifically rally behind another candidate to oppose him, or instead put forward their own faction member to challenge him. Health Minister Kato Katsunobu, who like Economy Nishimura has risen to greater public prominence as a result of COVID, would seemingly be the most likely pick, but former Economy Minister Obuchi Yuko’s name has also been floated as a prospective Takeshita Faction candidate. Given Obuchi’s scandal-ridden tenure in the Cabinet, however, it seems less likely that she would be able to garner significant support from outside the faction were she to run.
Independents
Suga Yoshihide (formerly of the Kouchikai)
The Chief Cabinet Secretary throughout the entirety of the Second Abe Administration, Abe’s right-hand man for most of the past eight years, and, most recently, known nationwide as “Uncle Reiwa” for his announcing of the new era name. His influence within the Cabinet has dwindled in recent months, but if he were to be earnestly interested in the premiership he could be an extremely strong contender, especially given that he has in the past reportedly been on Abe’s personal shortlist of preferred successors. He generally seems to lack interest in the position, however, so he is likely more noteworthy as a potential powerbroker in the selection process – his lack of factional affiliation makes him a go-to free agent for candidates looking to shore up allies outside their own factions.
Noda Seiko
Former Internal Affairs Minister, and member of the same Diet class as Abe and Kishida. She has twice attempted to contest Abe’s party leadership, and both times failed to get the requisite support from 20 LDP lawmakers to stand as a candidate. She is widely regarded as the unofficial champion for women’s political advancement within the notoriously male-dominated LDP, but as an ardent independent without either a factional affiliation or a powerful sponsor, she has and will continue to struggle to gain traction in the presidential selection process.
Koizumi Shinjiro
As close as any politician comes to being a nationally beloved celebrity, perpetually near the top in public opinion polls of preferred future prime ministers, current Environment Minister Koizumi is nevertheless a long-shot among long-shots unless the leadership election goes to a general membership vote. He is the son of the ever-popular former Prime Minister Koizumi Junichiro, and has inherited much of his father’s star power - and, along with it, the disdain that many party leaders had for his dad, a perennial independent who routinely butted heads with the party’s factions, even once calling a snap election in which he attempted to neuter the factions by handpicking “assassin” candidates to contest faction members’ seats. His public profile garnered him a ministerial portfolio in the last cabinet reshuffle, but as Environment Minister he has been repeatedly saddled with difficult and unpopular jobs seemingly designed to handicap his career, signaling the extent to which the old guard still see him, his popularity, and his family name as as much a threat as an asset. At age 39, he would be the youngest-ever Japanese prime minister.
submitted by taisho_roman to neoliberal [link] [comments]


2020.08.18 04:17 nyadnov [H] Various Games [W] Automachef

Hello there!
Welcome to my trader page and feel free to drop a comment with your list of games if you see something interesting in my list of games.
I'm also looking for PayPal/Steam wallet (Region: SEA) or CS GO/TF2 keys so I can buy the games that I want from Steam. BTC also works if you're into that.
Here are my rep pages:
SteamGameSwap Rep Page
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 1
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 2
Thanks for checking by and stay safe!
List of games:
Trading for PayPal/BTC only:
Humble Bundle Gift Links:
Unrevealed Keys:
submitted by nyadnov to SteamGameSwap [link] [comments]


2020.08.18 04:17 nyadnov [H] Various Games [W] Automachef

Hello there!
Welcome to my trader page and feel free to drop a comment with your list of games if you see something interesting in my list of games.
I'm also looking for PayPal/Steam wallet (Region: SEA) or CS GO/TF2 keys so I can buy the games that I want from Steam. BTC also works if you're into that.
Here are my rep pages:
SteamGameSwap Rep Page
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 1
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 2
Thanks for checking by and stay safe!
List of games:
Trading for PayPal/BTC only:
Humble Bundle Gift Links:
Unrevealed Keys:
submitted by nyadnov to indiegameswap [link] [comments]


2020.08.11 12:58 Sleepyblue Official Nardil UK shortage update

Official Nardil UK shortage update
Hey all,
A couple of months back I wrote to my GP regarding the Nardil shortage in the UK. They responded that they had written to the NHS South East London Clinical Commissioning Group and to the Head of NHS England, and I recently received this follow up forwarded on from the Department of Health and Social Care's Team received Leader for Ministerial Correspondence and Public Enquiries:

Thank you for your correspondence of 16 June on behalf of your constituent about the availability of phenelzine 15mg tablets (Nardil). I have been asked to reply.
I was sorry to read of the difficulties he has experienced in trying to obtain his medicine.
Medicine supply problems may be caused by a number of factors, including manufacturing difficulties, regulatory problems, problems with the supply of raw materials and issues related to distribution of the product. As the manufacture of medicines is complex and highly regulated, and materials and processes must meet rigorous safety and quality standards, difficulties can arise for various reasons.
There is a team of pharmacists in the Department of Health and Social Care that deals specifically with medicine supply problems arising both in the community and in hospitals. It has well-established procedures to deal with medicine shortages, whatever the cause, and works closely with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, the pharmaceutical industry, NHS England and NHS Improvement (NHSE&I) and others operating in the supply chain to help prevent shortages and to ensure that the risks to patients are minimised when shortages do arise.
Regarding the availability of Nardil, the Department is aware that the sole supplier in the UK, Kyowa Kirin, has been out of stock since August 2019, and is unable to advise on a resupply date, due to ongoing manufacturing issues. Where clinicians have deemed it appropriate, during the shortage of Nardil, some patients have been maintained on unlicensed phenelzine 15mg tablets, imported from abroad by specialist importer companies. The Department issued communications to the NHS in August and October 2019 with information on supplies of the unlicensed products. Doctors prescribing unlicensed medicines do so entirely on their own responsibility, and are fully accountable for their patients’ welfare.
However, the Department has recently been made aware that these supplies from abroad have become sporadic and limited, due to supply issues in other markets, globally.
The Department understands the importance of this medicine and has been working closely with NHSE&I and national experts, in addition to the affected supplier and specialist importers, to resolve this issue as quickly as possible. On 25 June, comprehensive guidance was issued to healthcare professionals to support those affected.
Unlicensed imports of phenelzine tablets are available from unlicensed importer companies, including Chemys Ltd., Clinigen, Durbin, Rokshaw Pharmaceuticals and UL Global. In addition, supplies of unlicensed phenelzine 15mg capsules are currently available and pharmacies can source these through their usual routes. The following companies are able to supply unlicensed phenelzine 15mg capsule specials: Ascot Pharmaceuticals, Target Healthcare, Mawdsleys, Clinigen Group and Rokshaw Pharmaceuticals. Please note this is not an extensive list, and there may be other companies that can source supplies.
Under current legislation, doctors can prescribe unlicensed products for their patients if they think it appropriate. However, as mentioned previously, doctors prescribing unlicensed medicines do so entirely on their own responsibility. Therefore, the Department would advise that the patient makes his clinician and pharmacist aware of his concerns regarding the supply of phenelzine, and discuss appropriate options.
I hope that this reply is helpful.
Kind regards,
DOMINIC STANTON
Team Leader for Ministerial Correspondence and Public Enquiries
39 Victoria Street London
SW1H 0EU
020 7210 4850
For those of us that have been following the shortage closely, this might not shed any particular new light on the pieces we've put together ourselves, however, it's good to see that it is officially being recognised as an issue and hopefully our outreach has helped cement it on their radar. The contact details are included if you want to message the department directly yourselves.
I am myself now receiving the aforementioned unlicensed Ascot Pharmaceuticals Phenelzine, which comes in a capsule as pictured:

Phenelzine capsules
I'm not sure whether this form factor makes any difference. I've only been taking it a couple of days so I'd be interested to hear from anyone else who's taking this variant, as it's well documented that depending on the manufacturer, it can significantly alter both the efficacy and the side effects of the drug.
Either way, I hope this helps ease the anxiety for anyone who has felt the issue has gone unrecognised, and we can confirm that there is at least a stop-gap solution in place for the time being.
submitted by Sleepyblue to MAOIs [link] [comments]


2020.08.09 01:49 JacobInAustin In re End Childhood Marriage Act, 2020 DX 1

Supreme Court for the State of Dixie

In re End Childhood Marriage Act

Williams v. State of Dixie

No. 20-04 Decided on April 13th, 2020

Justice dewey-cheatem delivered the opinion of the Court.
I. Background
¶ 1. On grounds of purported infringement on the free exercise of religion and the fundamental right to marriage, Petitioner challenges the constitutionality of the operative section of the End Childhood Marriage Act, B.093 (hereinafter “the Act”), passed by the Dixie Assembly on April 14th, 2019, and signed into law by Governor blockdenied on April 15th, 2019.
¶ 1A. The challenged section provides as follows: (a) No child under the age of eighteen has the right to get married in the state of Dixie (i) Any Civil or Religious person found guilty of breaking this law shall be found guilty of a felony crime against a child (1) Position shall be removed from them (2) No less than 5 years in prison for neglect of the welfare of a child (b) There shall be no religious exemptions to this law
¶ 2. Today we uphold the law in its entirety with the exception of section (a)(i)(1), which would require the removal of religious personnel from their offices.
INTERPRETING THE MEANING OF THE STATUTE
II. Interpreting The Meaning of the Statute
¶ 3. The wording of the statute is not entirely clear, requiring us to discern the practical operation of its provisions. For example, section 2(a) declares that “[n]o child under the age of eighteen has the right to get married in the state of Dixie.” This provision does not itself prohibit child marriage, it merely declares there is no right for persons under eighteen to marry. Taken alone, this provision would simply mean that municipalities and local governments are permitted to decline to recognize child marriages.
¶ 4. However, the canons of statutory interpretation require us to read the entire statute and give effect to all of its provisions. As a result, we conclude that section 2(a), read in conjunction with the other provisions of the statute, not only allows municipalities to prohibit child marriage but further prohibits all child marriage, including both effective participation in it and issuances of licenses recognizing it.
¶ 5. For example, subsection 2(a)(i) imposes criminal sanctions against “any civil or religious person” (emphasis added). Because only judges and clerks may issue marriage licenses, the language encompasses “any” civil or religious “person”--as opposed to limiting the language to clerks or judges--compels the conclusion that the statute reaches both civilly-recognized and privately-practiced child marriages.
¶ 6. This understanding is supported by the Act’s legislative history. The persons speaking on the floor in support of the bill spoke about the prohibition in broad terms. For example, cold_brew_coffee called for the body to pass the Act so that “no minor can be coerced into an unscrupulous marriage.” Likewise, GuiltyAir said:
¶ 6A. It's without a doubt that I fully stand in support of this bill and I question the morality of those who don't. I know a lot of you see this bill today are probably already thinking that child marriages are already banned, but that just isn't true. It happens in America more than any one of us would like and I'm glad that Dixie is tackling the issue head-on. There is absolutely no reason nor should there be of someone under the age of 18 getting married, which is the age of consent and generally regarded as the age when someone becomes an adult.
¶ 7. In speaking this broadly about the breadth and likely effect of the Act, these commentators confirm that the purpose of the Assembly was to reach beyond declining to recognize a “right” to child marriage to withdraw all legal recognition and to impose criminal sanction upon those practicing child marriage in private.
III. Statute Constitutional Generally
A. Free Exercise
¶ 8. We hold that, while strict scrutiny applies due to the free exercise standard announced in Carey v. Dixie Inn, 2020 U.S. 1, and due to Dixie’s religious freedom law, the law is constitutional except for the single provision addressed infra because it is narrowly tailored to advance a compelling government interest.
1. Strict Scrutiny Applies
¶ 9. The high standard of strict scrutiny applies for two independent reasons.
¶ 10. First, it has become increasingly apparent that the standard governing First Amendment free exercise claims is no longer the relaxed standard of “rational basis” set forth in Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), but rather strict scrutiny, as previously articulated by this Court in Carey v. Dixie Inn, Dx. No. 19-21 (Sept. 2019) (“We concur with the appellee that Smith is simply no longer an applicable test as the United States Supreme Court has since moved on from its usage”) and reiterated on appeal by the Supreme Court in that same case, Carey v. Dixie Inn, 2020 U.S. 1, ¶ 12 (“When . . . thoughts or words turn to behavior -- to ACTION -- those actions, as manifestations of the religious beliefs (whatever they are) can be regulated, but only when such regulations are necessary to a compelling state interest, are narrowly tailored to achieve the purpose, and use the least restrictive means of achieving the purpose.”). See also In re Stopping Abuse and Indoctrination of Children Act, 100 M.S. Ct. 111 (2016) (applying strict scrutiny to neutral and generally applicable statute challenged on free exercise grounds).
¶ 11. Second, Dixie statutory law, Dx. Stat. § 761.03, requires that where the government “substantially burden[s] a person’s exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability” the government must “demonstrate[ ] that application of the burden to the person” is “in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest” and “the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.” See Carey v. Dixie Inn, 2018 Dx. App. 1, at 3 (2018), *aff’d Dx. No. 19-21 (Sept. 2019) (applying section 761.03).
¶ 12. Because we find strict scrutiny applies for these two distinct reasons, we need not reach the question of whether the law is “neutral” or “generally applicable.”
2. The Statute Survives Strict Scrutiny
¶ 13. Notwithstanding that strict scrutiny applies, the statute is constitutional because the statute advances a compelling government interest and does so in a manner narrowly tailored to achieve that government interest.
¶ 14. We reach this conclusion pursuant to an independent analysis because while once strict scrutiny was considered “strict in theory but fatal in fact,” Gerald Gunther, The Supreme Court, 1971--Forward: In Search of Evolving Doctrine on a Changing Court: A Model for a Newer Equal Protection, 86 Harv. L. Rev., 1, 8 (1972), this is no longer the case. E.g., Note: Strict in Theory, Not Fatal in Fact: An Analysis of Federal Affirmative Action Programs in the Wake of Adarand v. Pena, 11 St. John’s J. Legal Comment 101 (1996). Most recently, the United States Supreme Court in its decision in Dixie Inn applied strict scrutiny but nonetheless upheld the statute in question. See Carey v. Dixie Inn, 2020 U.S 1.
¶ 15. We begin by noting that the statute advances a compelling government interest in preserving the health and well-being of minors. The legislative findings of the Act, for example, notes that under child marriages girls “are more likely to face health risks and the families are more likely to perpetuate the cycle of poverty.”
¶ 16. It is well-established that preserving the health and well-being of the public, and of minors in particular, constitutes a compelling government interest. See, e.g., Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265, 310 (1978) (“It may be assumed that in some situations a State's interest in facilitating the health care of its citizens is sufficiently compelling to support the use of a suspect classification.”); Buchwald v. Univ. of N.M. Sch. of Med., 159 F.3d 487, 498 (10th Cir.1998) (citing Bakke to conclude that “public health is a compelling government interest”); Legatus v. Sebelius, 901 F. Supp. 2d 980, 991 (E.D. Mich. 2012); Mead v. Holder, 766 F. Supp. 2d 16, 43 (D.D.C.2011) (“The Government clearly has a compelling interest in safeguarding the public health by regulating the health care and insurance markets.”); Dickerson v. Stuart, 877 F. Supp. 1556, 1559 (M.D.Fla.1995) (“The State of Florida has a compelling interest in the health of expectant mothers and the safe delivery of newborn babies.”).
¶ 17. Furthermore, the statute is narrowly tailored to advance these compelling interests. The statute here targets harms specific to child marriage, which are well-documented. E.g., Nour, Nawal M. “Health consequences of child marriage in Africa.” Emerging infectious diseases vol. 12,11 (2006): 1644-9. doi:10.3201/eid1211.060510. Indeed, the United Nations has identified child marriage as a serious global problem, explaining “[c]hild marriage threatens the lives, well-being and futures of girls around the world.” E.g., Child Marriage, UNICEF, available at https://www.unicef.org/protection/child-marriage. One study, for example, has outlined the harms that necessarily result from child marriage and specifically cites to research conducted by the United Nations:
¶ 17A. The negative consequences of child marriage are considerable for girls, their families, their communities, and ultimately their countries. At the individual level, child marriage deprives girls of basic human rights and marks an abrupt end to childhood, bringing on a rapid transition to adulthood and forcing girls to take on adult roles and responsibilities before they are developmentally ready (UNICEF 2001 and 2005; Mathur, Greene, and Malhotra 2003; Jain and Kurz 2007). Moreover, because child marriage in most societies is quickly followed by childbearing, the risk of maternal mortality and morbidity and infant mortality increases (UNICEF 2001 and 2005; Bott et al. 2003; Mathur, Greene, and Malhotra 2003; Save the Children 2004; Mensch, Singh, and Casterline 2005). Young married girls are also at greater risk of intimate partner violence (IPV) (Santhya et al. 2010) and HIV/AIDS (Clark 2004). Child marriage is negatively associated with girls’ education as well. Although the direction of causality in this relationship likely runs in both directions, the evidence is strong that girls with low levels of schooling are more likely to be married early, and child marriage typically puts an end to a girl’s education (Jejeebhoy 1995; Mathur, Greene, and Malhotra 2003; Mensch, Singh, and Casterline 2005). Lack of education and restricted access to peers limit a child bride’s support systems; without skills, mobility, and connections, her ability to overcome poverty for herself, her children, and her family is hindered (Preston-Whyte et al. 1990; Singh 1998; Zabin and Kiragu 1998). Susan Lee‐Rife, et al., What Works to Prevent Child Marriage: A Review of the Evidence, 43 Studies in Family Planning 287 (2012).
¶ 18. These harms are specifically linked to child marriage and are demonstrably caused by child marriage. While the state can seek to advance the general interest of child well-being in other ways, prohibition of child marriage is the only way the state can address the harms caused by child marriage itself.
¶ 19. For similar reasons, Petitioner’s insistence that the state is able to address the evils associated with child marriage, such as sexual abuse and rape, in the absence of prohibiting child marriage carries no weight. Notably, statutory rape statutes do not extend to the marital relationship.
¶ 20. Petitioner also claims that the state could achieve its interests more narrowly by requiring parental and judicial consent and by raising the minimum age for marriage to 17.1 This argument is unpersuasive.
1 Meta: In briefing, Petitioner invoked Florida Statute section 741.04, which restricts the circumstances under which a certificate to marry may be issued to persons under 18, is proof that the Act is not “narrowly tailored.” However, that statute was passed and signed into law before (March 2018) the date of canon divergence (July 2018) but not effective until July 2018, subsequent to the date of canon divergence and therefore is not in effect in the Model US Government Universe. Instead, we treat this argument as a hypothetical alternative proposal advanced by Petitioner.
¶ 21. First, Petitioner herself is 16 years old. Accordingly, even if Petitioner were right that the instant statute is unconstitutional, she would still be unable to marry under her own hypothetical proposal. Second, Petitioner’s arguments aimed at the instant statute apply with equal force to her own hypothetical proposal.
¶ 22. Third, and most important, however: the proposal’s “narrower” prohibition on child marriage does not address all concerns the legislature sought to address. For example, Petitioner’s hypothetical may require parental consent and judicial approval of certain child marriages but such consent and approval often fails to prevent egregious harms. In one column in The New York Times, Nicholas Kristof recounted the tale of a child who was forced by her parents to marry her rapist; the judge approved the marriage “to end the rape investigation” and told her “[w]hat we want is for you to get married.” Nicholas Kristof, 11 Years Old, a Mom, and Pushed to Marry Her Rapist in Florida, New York Times (May 26, 2017), https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/26/opinion/sunday/it-was-forcedon-me-child-marriage-in-the-us.html. While the hypothetical would also raise the minimum wage, the requirement of parental and judicial approval is obviously insufficient. In addition, all minors, not just those under 17, suffer under childhood marriage because by virtue of being minors they face greater barriers to objecting to or leaving the marriage than non-minors.
¶ 23. Fourth, the Act recognizes and reacts to the reality that child marriage is practiced both through legal recognition and without such recognition. Famously, the leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints took on several child brides, notwithstanding his inability to obtain marriage licenses for those marriages. Chris Baynes, Warren Jeffs: Child bride reveals horrors of life under fundamentalist Mormon sect leader, The Independent (Feb. 20, 2018), available at https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/warren-jeffs-child-bride-horrors-mormon-sect-leader-elissa-wall-a8219246.html. The Act furthers the government’s interest in protecting children from these situations because, first, many of the harms associated with child marriage still exist without legal recognition of the union and even if the child spouse is not subjected to sexual activity and, second, because prosecutions for statutory rape in this context is extraordinarily hard. Jeffs, for example, is currently serving a prison term for sexually assaulting two underage girls--but he had dozens of wives, many of them underage.
¶ 24. For these reasons, we find that the Act is narrowly tailored to advance a compelling government interest and, therefore, is constitutional.
B. Fundamental Right to Marry
¶ 25. Petitioner also claims that the Act violates the fundamental right to marry as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment and also, supposedly, by the Dixie constitution. We address each contention in turn.
¶ 26. First, there can be little doubt that there exists a fundamental right to marry guaranteed by the United States Constitution. [cite]. Even assuming, without holding, that such a right applies to Petitioner, this does not mean the statute must fail: a fundamental right triggers strict scrutiny, not necessarily a finding of unconstitutionality. In a case considering a constitutional challenge to a ban on same-sex marriage, for example, the Ninth Circuit specifically addressed child marriage:
¶ 26A. "[F]undamental rights may sometimes permissibly be abridged: when the laws at issue further compelling state interests, to which they are narrowly tailored. Although such claims are not before us, it is not difficult to envision that states could proffer substantially more compelling justifications for such laws than have been put forward in support of the same-sex marriage bans at issue here." Latta v. Otter, 771 F.3d 456, 478 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2014).
¶ 27. Although this passage is dicta, it is also an uncontroversial proposition: that, even assuming the fundamental right to marry applies to child marriages, the standard of strict scrutiny is met because, as outlined above, because prohibiting child marriage is narrowly tailored to advance a compelling government interest.
¶ 28. Petitioner also invokes a “right to marriage” putatively guaranteed by Article I, Section 27 of the Dixie Constitution. Yet that provision guarantees no right: it merely “defines” marriage as “the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife” and bars recognition of any “other legal union.” This provision was adopted as a constitutional amendment in 2008 to prevent recognition of same-sex marriage; it was adopted to restrict the rights of Dixieans, not expand them. In fact, if anything, Section 27 precludes any recognition of child marriage under state law. By defining marriage as between “one man and one woman,” section 27 restricts marriage to two adult humans: the definition of “man” is “an adult human male” and the definition of “woman” is “an adult human female.”
IV. Removal of Ministers Unconstitutional
¶ 29. By demanding the removal of offenders from “civil and religious” positions, section (a)(i)(1) of the Act violates the constitutional right to free exercise of religion and prohibition on the establishment of religion. “The Establishment Clause prevents the Government from appointing ministers, and the Free Exercise Clause prevents it from interfering with the freedom of religious groups to select their own.” Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & Sch. v. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n, 565 U.S. 171, 184 (2012). Thus the Supreme Court has recognized a “ministerial exception,” a constitutional principle which prohibits such interference.
¶ 30. Were Section (a)(i)(1) permitted to stand, it would result in the government dictating to religious entities who could and could not serve as their clergy or other ministerial positions, an unacceptable outcome that flies in the face of all constitutional jurisprudence. Id. at 190-191 (noting appellate court consensus that “the ministerial exception is not limited to the head of a religious congregation”).
¶ 31. We therefore find Section (2)(a)(i)(1) unconstitutional and enjoin its enforcement to the extent it applies to the removal of persons covered by the constitutional ministerial exception.
V. Conclusion
¶ 32. For the reasons set forth above, we find that the statute is constitutional except as to Section 2(a)(i)(1).
submitted by JacobInAustin to ModelOpinions [link] [comments]


2020.08.06 04:47 nyadnov [H] Various Games [W] Game Offers (send me your list of games) / TF2 keys / PayPal / BTC

Hello there!
Welcome to my trader page and feel free to drop a comment with your list of games if you see something interesting in my list of games.
I'm also looking for PayPal/Steam wallet (Region: SEA) or CS GO/TF2 keys so I can buy the games that I want from Steam. BTC also works if you're into that.
Here are my rep pages:
SteamGameSwap Rep Page
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 1
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 2
Thanks for checking by and stay safe!
List of games:
Trading for PayPal/BTC only:
Humble Bundle Gift Links:
Unrevealed Keys:
submitted by nyadnov to SteamGameSwap [link] [comments]


2020.08.06 04:46 nyadnov [H] Various Games [W] Game Offers (send me your list of games) / TF2 keys / PayPal / BTC

Hello there!
Welcome to my trader page and feel free to drop a comment with your list of games if you see something interesting in my list of games.
I'm also looking for PayPal/Steam wallet (Region: SEA) or CS GO/TF2 keys so I can buy the games that I want from Steam. BTC also works if you're into that.
Here are my rep pages:
SteamGameSwap Rep Page
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 1
IndieGameSwap Rep Page 2
Thanks for checking by and stay safe!
List of games:
Trading for PayPal/BTC only:
Humble Bundle Gift Links:
Unrevealed Keys:
submitted by nyadnov to indiegameswap [link] [comments]


2020.08.04 07:02 InternetFreedomIn Avoiding App Bans with a nuanced policy approach

Avoiding App Bans with a nuanced policy approach

https://preview.redd.it/iv3cgtmy3xe51.png?width=1024&format=png&auto=webp&s=22b8221daa67e490a7edcc0797a61e5556021a8b

tl;dr

As per news reports a coordinated effort is underway by the Government of India to strengthen its stance on banning mobile apps. According to a senior government official and other sources in the government, the GoI is planning to come out with guidelines, flouting which any app can be banned. Such wide scale banning would undermine nuanced policy approaches for protecting the digital rights of the citizens. We have some alternatives and suggestions to protect users, innovation and the larger national interest. So, we wrote to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) urging them to develop a transparent cybersecurity policy, and asking them to expedite the work on the Personal Data Protection Bill.

Proposed guidelines on the banning of mobile applications and websites

In this Economic Times article dated July 27, a senior government official has reportedly stated that the government is currently working on a protocol, which shall define expectations and rules to be fulfilled by all mobile applications. Failure to comply may lead to the application being banned by the government. However, the framework through which these proposed guidelines will be enforced remains unclear. It has been suggested that various ministries including the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, the Ministry of Communications, and the Ministry of Home Affairs shall be part of the consultative process, which will form these guidelines or rules.

IFF’s View

In a statement published on July 1, 2020 on the banning of 59 mobile applications we asked for transparency in the process through which these applications had been banned. This is in line with our consistent view regarding the government’s operational practice much more widely when the powers under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 are utilised.
We further pointed out that such blanket bans would undermine the digital rights of Indian citizens and set a worrying precedent. These bans are in deviation from the current rule of law framework under the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the decisions of the Supreme Court in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India.
We firmly believe that such bans stifle innovation and are harmful to the growing technological ecosystem of the country. While innovators should be assured that the government supports them through a stable and reliable system, strengthening this ‘ban regime’ by legitimising it through official guidelines will hurt the interests of the public at large. Recently, India has seen opaque and arbitrary acts of censorship where websites like DuckDuckGo and WeTransfer and websites dedicated to environmental awareness and activism like FridaysForFuture and LetIndiaBreathe were blocked. A ban regime may further contribute to this ongoing arbitrary practice and thus should not be introduced.

What should be done instead?

In our letter dated 31 July 2020, we wrote to MeitY suggesting that instead of formalising a ban regime, the government should direct its efforts towards both coming up with progressive reforms, and expediting important policy processes for the forumulation of insitutional frameworks of enforcement.
To this effect, we made 4 broad recommendations :
  1. Advancing the National Cyber Security Policy: We suggested a rights-centred, effective and evidence based approach towards the National Cyber Security Policy that puts India’s interests first. All penalties under it from the life cycle of investments towards operations in emerging and foundational sectors such as technology are the need of the hour. We also suggested that the ongoing process for the formulation of the National Cyber Security Strategy (NCSS) 2020 under which the draft recommendations must be accelerated towards finalisation but first put through another round of expert and public consultation.
  2. Focus on the Data Protection Bill and the Competition Act: Furthermore, we emphasised the need for a well-drafted Personal Data Protection Bill, which can safeguard the privacy of personal data of citizens through clear standards and evidence. While we understand that the draft bill currently lies with a Joint Parliamentary Committee(JPC) for scrutiny, steps can be taken by MeitY to expedite the process by coordinated effort with the JPC by providing written context and explanations on key legislative choices.
  3. Considering inter-ministerial inputs on Competition Law: Further there are ongoing processes by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs to examine amendments to the Competition Act in which inputs on data side harms are also being considered. Here, inter-ministerial inputs may be of immense value. This is due to repeated allegations and instances of the abuse of market power and unfair trade practices by technology companies which sometimes if left unaddressed lead to grievances which then lead to demands for ad-hoc actions such as bans.
  4. Adoption of graded penalties: We also recommended that instead of placing blanket bans on applications which fail to meet the standards set by the NCSS and PDP Bill, the government should adopt a system of graded penalties wherein defaulters can be penalized monetarily and through requisite changes in operational practices in situations of non-compliance. This penalty should be accompanied with a framework which ensures that the defaulter makes an effort to comply with the standards set by the government, failing which further penalties may even be escalated in exceptional circumstances towards complete prohibitions which are term limited, or on repeated violations may even be perpetual. We intend to follow up and will keep urging all our government institutions to take clear steps to protect your digital rights.
Important Links
  1. Representation to the MeitY urging them to rethink the move on generalised guidelines for banning apps dated July 31, 2020. [link]
  2. Our initial statement on the government’s press release on 29 June 2020, which banned 59 mobile apps dated July 1, 2020. [link]
  3. IFF’s solidarity with LetIndiaBreathe (LIB) and FridaysForFuture and subsequent action on behalf of LIB dated July 13, 2020. [link]
  4. Blog post on the blocking of DuckDuckGo and our action dated July 2, 2020. [link]
  5. Blog post on blocking of WeTransfer and our action dated June 9, 2020. [link]
We are running a device drive to upgrade our cyber security infrastructure. Please consider donating to this fundraiser we are hosting to provide tech support to our staff today!
submitted by InternetFreedomIn to india [link] [comments]


2020.07.28 23:51 stilllovesjah A comprehensive Jehovah's Witness speak dictionary.

The further I get from being mentally in the harder it's getting for me to remember the new speak that JWs employ. I decided to document everything I can remember and figured I would make it public in case anyone else can contribute or make use of this.
I really want this to be as accurate as possible. So please call me out if I am making any assumptions, if anything is incorrect, outdated, or misrepresented and I will change it. I want someone who has never heard of JWs before to be able to use this as a reference to understand what they're saying.
New words and phrases:
Redefined words and phrases:
submitted by stilllovesjah to exjw [link] [comments]


2020.07.27 16:14 fiftythreestudio From an attorney: let's talk about why the zoning law makes it so hard to build new housing in LA.

In this excellent post from a few years back, clipstep discussed the building code and financial reasons why LA only seems to build luxury condos. I'm going to talk about the legal reasons why this is so. As always, this is not legal advice. Please hire an attorney if you have individual zoning questions.
Bottom-line, up front: LA land use laws are so restrictive and bureaucratic that it's not financially possible to build small, no-frills apartment buildings anymore like we did in the past.
I'll start by talking about how our zoning laws work, and then go into why LA zoning law makes it impossible to build non-luxury apartments.
How zoning laws work
Let's start by talking about how the law works. Every piece of land has a zoning designation, which specifies what is and isn't legal to build on a piece of land. LA City has a comprehensive zoning map if you want to peruse it. If you want to build something new that isn't allowed by the zoning code, you're going to have to go to City Hall, to get a zoning variance - that is, a special permit to build something other than what's explicitly allowed by law. The City Council is under no obligation to grant you a variance, and if you don't grease palms you're likely to get shot down. This is in addition to the exhaustive review required under the California Environmental Quality Act that I discussed previously.
Keep this in mind while I take you on a short tour of LA's zoning law.
Pre-1960s zoning law
LA was designed to be sprawling from the very beginning. In 1904, the City Council put a height limit of 150 feet (~13 stories) on the city - in a period when NYC and Chicago had already gotten to 400 feet (30 stories). This was designed to prevent "the undue concentration of traffic," as a 1925 County report put it. Same for residential zoning, which had setback requirements to encourage single-family construction. This is why LA doesn't have rowhouse neighborhoods like you see in SF, NYC or Philadelphia, even though most of LA was laid out during the Red Car era.
In the olden days, the intensity of development tended to match the value of the land. I'll illustrate by starting in DTLA and going west. This is 6th and Broadway, in the Historic Core, with a mix of skyscrapers and mid-rise commercial space; go outbound a few miles to 3rd and New Hampshire in Koreatown and it's all lots of small, low-slung apartment buildings; by Miracle Mile you start seeing a bunch of single family homes interspersed with the apartments; keep going three miles further out to Cheviot Hills and it's all recognizably suburban and single-family. Back in the day, out of date single-family homes would gradually be torn down and replaced with apartments, or they'd be cut up into apartments, like on old Bunker Hill.
This kind of semi-organic development was normal until the 1960s. But then a pretty dramatic shift happened: LA was growing so quickly, and land values were rising so fast, that lots of small apartment buildings started popping up in single-family residential neighborhoods, especially on the Westside. This is where zoning laws started to get really restrictive.
The changes of the late '60s through '90s
The small apartment buildings that triggered this revolt are called are called dingbats. They're those boxy buildings you see all over the place with pompous names like "La Traviata" or "Chateau Antoinette". These kinds of housing weren't pretty - but they were no-frills apartments you could afford if you were an actor, or a grocery clerk, or a secretary. This scared the hell out of homeowners in rich neighborhoods, because apartments were for poor people and minorities. So, we voted for politicians who reduced the zoning of LA bit by bit, effectively freezing the status quo in place. And after 1970, rich communities just stopped building new housing, period. You can see the results from the population table below.
City 1970 population 2019 population
Beverly Hills 33,416 33,792
Manhattan Beach 35,352 35,183
San Marino 14,177 13,048
Santa Monica 88,289 90,401
South Pasadena 22,979 25,329
Even in LA City the reduction in capacity was really drastic. In 1960, LA City, population 2.5 million, had a zoning code that allowed for 10 million inhabitants worth of housing. By 2010, LA City, population 4 million, had a zoning code that allowed for 4.3 million inhabitants - and about 75% of LA City's land was reserved for single-family homes only. Existing apartment buildings are grandfathered in, but it's not legal to build new ones.
Why the zoning laws make it impossible to build small non-luxury apartments
These restrictive zoning changes mean that small, cheap apartment buildings are largely off-limits today. It simply makes no sense to spend $150,000 on environmental review, hire lawyers to get a variance, and get into a years-long fight with the city council to build 6 measly apartments. You have to build big, or go home. Big, politically-connected developers can do that, because these bureaucratic and legal costs are already built in to their business model. Large corporate developers can spread the costs of attorneys and political wrangling across a few dozen or a few hundred mid-rise apartments, especially if you aim it at the luxury market.
But there's just no good legal way to build simple no-frills apartments anymore, because it's so much hassle and expense to get them approved. It's not a technological problem - it's a legal and political one.
So how do we fix this?
There's a good bill in the state legislature which would rezone all single-family parcels for four units, eliminate minimum parking requirements near transit, exempt these small apartments from environmental review, and provide for automatic approval so the City Council and the neighbors can't meddle. If it meets the building code, your project gets approved, period. The Legislature did this already with granny flats and backyard cottages, as well as with certain types of affordable housing, and it's dramatically sped up the process of approving new construction. Doing the same for small apartment buildings would make it financially possible to build non-luxury apartments again, because it means way less money spent on lawyers and more money for building.
EDIT: a lot of people have asked just why the environmental review exception matters. The reason is that the California Environmental Quality Act puts all new projects through the same level of exhaustive review, so a four-unit apartment building is subject to the same level of scrutiny as (say) an oil refinery. Preparing one is extremely expensive, and the neighbors love to litigate the environmental impact report. This often makes it impossible to build smaller non-luxury buildings. If you want to see what environmental review looks like, here's a pretty standard environmental impact report from a 248-unit complex in Torrance.
submitted by fiftythreestudio to LosAngeles [link] [comments]


Dating in Ministry  Singles Chat  #YLC TV #Share - YouTube Single Dating and God Ministry - LEVEL - UP SELF Devotion ... 8 REASONS SINGLE MOTHERS ARE THE $LUTS OF THE DATING SCENE Singleness & Dating in Ministry: a Digital Lab - YouTube THE ART OF ONLINE DATING- MINISTER JAP & MYRON GAINS - YouTube

Advise on dating a minister!? Yahoo Answers

  1. Dating in Ministry Singles Chat #YLC TV #Share - YouTube
  2. Single Dating and God Ministry - LEVEL - UP SELF Devotion ...
  3. 8 REASONS SINGLE MOTHERS ARE THE $LUTS OF THE DATING SCENE
  4. Singleness & Dating in Ministry: a Digital Lab - YouTube
  5. THE ART OF ONLINE DATING- MINISTER JAP & MYRON GAINS - YouTube

Single Dating and God Ministry ( SDG ) Prayer time at 6am every Friday morning. This is our time to break down the stress, worries and celebrate just who is ... For exclusive classic banned and uncut content by Minister Jap Join us on Patreon and become a member. Click the link to sign up https://www.patreon.com/them... To book a 1 on 1 consultation session with Minister Jap Email me @ [email protected] or text 773-417-6160 for details 'Disclaimer' This is not the live show number or for comments. 🚨Dating in Ministry Singles Chat #YLC TV #Share Eric and Bethany Miller and Eric and Vanessa Smith talk about singleness and dating in ministry. Eric is the director of ministry operations for CE National ...