The waitress rescues the boy from his abusive parents by sending him a message asking "Do you need help?"
Coronavirus Scotland: Nicola Sturgeon bans alcohol in pubs
Nicola Sturgeon (pictured today) has unveiled a dramatic "breaker" print that coincides with mid-school hours north of the border
Nicola Sturgeon warned that coronavirus cases have increased among the older generation today as she banned pubs and restaurants from serving alcohol in Scotland for at least 16 days from Friday.
The First Minister told Holyrood MSPs that the situation was "better than March" but admitted that she had to take a "step backwards" when she unveiled a dramatic "breaker" pressure that started with school halftime north of the Border coincided.
In addition to the ban on alcohol consumption, restaurants are only open from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m.
In five "hotspot" areas, pubs will be closed until October 26th and people are advised not to use public transport.
Ms. Sturgeon said if it were a "purely one-dimensional public health decision" there would be an even tougher lockdown, but she was considering the general economy and wellbeing.
The extraordinary move – which Ms. Sturgeon said would come with new compensation for affected companies – comes after Scotland reported more than 1,000 new infections in one day.
It will put pressure on Boris Johnson, who was faced with damn numbers this afternoon showing local restrictions in England are failing to contain the cases. Ministers and advisers in the war consider what to do next.
At a stormy PMQ meeting, Mr Johnson stressed that the effects of the surge were being felt worst in the north. This shows that the mix of tough local bans and national restrictions such as the curfew for pubs after rule 6 and 10 p.m. is the right one.
Support for "differentiated" action in England suggests that the Prime Minister is still resisting pressure from academics for blanket action – an obvious boost for Cabinet Ministers alarmed by the threat to millions of jobs and civil liberties.
But union leader Keir Starmer launched a furious attack on Mr Johnson in the House of Commons, saying that 19 out of 20 areas exposed to local curbs in the past two months have actually seen increases in infections. He insisted that the measures "do not work" and highlighted the controversial curfew at 10 pm for pubs, according to which the government had not provided a "scientific basis".
As chaotic fighting threatened to engulf the government, allies of Chancellor Rishi Sunak, seen as the leading "hawk" on the need to protect the economy, today denied allegations that he tried to deter Michael Gove from making decisions on which areas he succumbs the most draconian restrictions.
The dispute is believed to hold back the announcement of a new three-tier traffic light system designed to remove confusion about which rules apply where in England.
Tensions between ministers were underscored this morning when Matt Hancock told executives that hospitalization rates have risen "very sharply" and the government has a "very serious problem". But Trade Secretary Liz Truss suggested in a round of interviews that the current balance of restrictions is "right".
Meanwhile, executives from four Covid-affected cities in the north, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Newcastle, have written to Mr Johnson asking him not to ride up the coronavirus curbs again – which could mean pubs and restaurants are completely closed will.
In other twists of today's coronavirus crisis:
Sir Keir hinted that Labor will join Tory rebels in a key vote next week against the controversial 10 p.m. pub curfew, increasing the prospect of losing the government.
Scientists from the world's top universities have written an open letter calling on the UK and US to strengthen herd immunity to Covid-19 by letting it spread to young people.
Concerns have been raised about the supply of vital test materials for a number of conditions, including Covid-19following a supply chain problem with pharmaceutical giant Roche;
The number of Covid-19 hospital admissions in England has increased 25 percent in one day, according to government data.
The number of daily cases in Scotland rose from under 300 two weeks ago – when a ban on indoor mixing was introduced – and has reported 1,054 cases today
Boris Johnson (pictured left at PMQs today) is desperate to allay fears of an increase in infections and hospital stays, particularly in the north. However, union leader Keir Starmer (right) said that 19 out of 20 areas exposed to local curbs in the past two months have actually seen an increase in infections
Key points of the new Scottish lock from Sturgeon
Strict new rules for 16 days from 6 p.m. on Friday
The sale of alcohol in pubs and restaurants is prohibited nationwide
Pubs and restaurants in the central belt closed
6 p.m. curfew for all indoor hospitality venues in the rest of the country
Outdoor bars can stay open until 10pm and serve alcohol
The Scots already said not to visit each other
The "non-essential" use of public transport is not recommended
Ms. Sturgeon said indoor hospitality venues can only be open between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. daily and can only sell food and soft drinks.
Bars, restaurants and outdoor cafes are allowed to stay open until 10 p.m. and sell alcohol until then.
The restrictions will go into effect on Friday at 6:00 p.m. and are expected to end after October 25th.
However, all licensed premises in the Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Lanarkshire, Ayrshire and Arran, Lothian and Forth Valley areas are closed to both indoor and outdoor use.
Cafes without a license to sell alcohol are allowed to be open until 6 p.m., the Prime Minister said to counteract social isolation.
People in the central belt of Scotland have been asked to avoid public transport unless it is strictly necessary for the next two weeks.
While no travel restrictions are placed on people in these five areas, Ms. Sturgeon urged those living in these areas not to travel beyond their own health authorities.
Ms. Stör said: “Let me be clear. We will not go into lockdown again today.
“We are not closing schools, colleges or universities.
& # 39; We're not stopping the NHS remobilizing for non-Covid care. And we don't ask people to stay home.
“The actions I am announcing today will feel like a step backwards, but they are in the interests of protecting our progress as a whole.
"By taking the tough but necessary measures now, we hope that we can avoid even tougher measures in the future."
At her daily briefing yesterday, Ms. Sturgeon said infections were spreading from younger populations to older age groups.
The number of daily cases has risen from under 300 two weeks ago – when a ban on indoor mixing was introduced – and has reported 1,054 cases today.
Ms. Sturgeon described the situation as "the most difficult decision point we have ever faced".
However, it had already ruled out school closings and travel restrictions across Scotland.
It will also not require people to stay in their homes most of the time, as it did in March, although some additional action may be required in “hotspot” areas.
Concerns about the lack of Covid and cancer tests after the warehouse failed
Concerns about the supply of critical test materials for a range of conditions, including Covid-19, emerged following a supply chain issue with pharmaceutical giant Roche.
On Tuesday, Roche announced that processing capacity had "decreased dramatically" due to a problem with the Sussex distribution center in Newhaven, the only one in the UK.
The shortage has been reported to include vital reagents, screening kits, and swabs.
In addition to providing these chemicals and parts used in Covid-19 tests, Roche also offers materials for a variety of procedures, including blood and urine tests, and for treating diabetics.
It comes days after the government confirmed that a technical error caused 16,000 positive test results to be missed.
The government is facing increasing pressure to increase coronavirus testing capacity as cases continue to rise. 14,542 new cases were registered yesterday. This means that the number of people who test positive for Covid-19 every day tripled within 14 days.
On bruising Sir Keir in the House of Commons, Mr Johnson appeared to rule out the possibility of an impending national clash.
"Although cases in the country have increased significantly across the country this week from last week, the 7-day statistics show that there are now 497 cases per 100,000 in Liverpool, 522 cases per 100,000 in Manchester and 422 in Newcastle" , he said .
"The key point is that the local regional approach combined with the national approach remains correct as two-thirds of those hospitalized on Sunday were in the North West, North East and Yorkshire."
But Sir Keir sparked a rant, pointing out that the government's local lockdown is clearly "not working".
& # 39; On nursing homes, protective gear, exams, tests. The prime minister ignores the warning signs, speeds towards a car accident, then looks in the rearview mirror and says, "What's this about?" he said.
"In hindsight, it's literally government."
Sir Keir added, "All the Prime Minister has to say is that it is too early to say if restrictions are working, but it is obvious that something has gone wrong here. What is the Prime Minister going to do about it?" "
The Labor leader pointed out that there were currently 62 cases per 100,000 in Mr Johnson's local authority, Hillingdon, with no local restrictions.
'But restrictions were imposed in 20 local areas across England when infection rates were much lower. In Kirklees it was only 29 per 100,000, ”he said.
“The local communities, Prime Ministers, really don't understand these differences. Can he please explain it to you? & # 39;
Mr Johnson replied, “I wish I could pretend everything was going to be rosy in the Midlands or in London, which is unfortunately also where infections are increasing.
"So we need a concerted national effort, we need to follow the directions, we need hands, face, space, a test if you have symptoms and follow the rule of six."
Sir Keir insisted that he support the government's rule of six.
But he took on a completely different tone as to whether Labor would support the 10 p.m. bar and restaurant curfew in England, which does more harm than good to critics as night owls only take to the streets.
"The Prime Minister cannot explain why an area is restricted, he cannot explain what the various restrictions are, he cannot explain how restrictions end – it is getting ridiculous," said Sir Keir.
& # 39; Next week this House will vote on whether to approve the 10pm rule. The Prime Minister knows that there are differently ingrained views across the country. A question now screams: Is there a scientific basis for the 10pm rule? & # 39;
Mr Johnson replied, "The basis on which we set out the hospitality restriction was the basis on which he accepted it two weeks ago – that is, to reduce the spread of the virus, and that is our goal."
The British government's scientific experts have publicly called for "urgent and drastic measures" to curb the rising numbers of infections and growing hospital admissions.
SAGE member John Edmunds said there needs to be a nationwide crackdown quickly, saying the current package of local bans, the 6pm and 10pm pubs curfew, is obviously not working.
Mr Edmunds told BBC Newsnight: “These local restrictions being put in place in the north have really not been very effective. We can see that rates are still rising. We have to take much stricter measures, not just in the north of England – we have to do it nationwide.
"We have to do a whole package across the country … I'd include circuit breaks to get the cases right."
He was particularly concerned about the 10 p.m. curfew, which was criticized for making matters worse by partying on the street and in homes.
"I really don't think it will do anything," he said.
Professor Calum Semple, who specializes in disease outbreaks, has called for a "breaker" of perhaps two weeks with strict restrictions.
Prof. Semple said, "A circuit breaker a few weeks ago would have been a really good idea."
He added, “It is always easier to reduce an outbreak earlier than let it go and then try to reduce it at a later time.
"Yes, circuit breakers are certainly something we should think about on a national basis."
Stephen Reicher, a professor of social psychology at the University of St. Andrews and another SAGE member, told BBC Radio 4's Today program that there was a "window of time" to keep the outbreak from reopening by the end of the month the March level is returning.
“I think it's important to do something because if you look at the numbers right now, the infection rate is around 10 percent of the March peak, but if it doubled, that would likely be the case by the end of October at the peak of March, ”he said.
“So the good news is that we have the opportunity to do something.
“If we miss this window of time, then we are really in trouble, then we would really talk about going back to March on lockdown measures. But we're not talking about that now. We have time. & # 39;
First victim of the curfew at 10 p.m .: the 200-year-old brewer Greene King will close 79 pubs and restaurants
Hundreds of jobs are at stake as Greene King will close numerous pubs after curfew and coronavirus lockdown at 10 p.m.
The company – with more than 3,000 pubs across the country – has today started a consultation process with 800 employees on a layoff process.
The heads of the company, with nearly 1,700 managed pubs and 1,000 rented venues, want to recruit affected employees whenever possible.
It plans to close 79 pubs and restaurants and believes a third of them will be permanent.
A spokesman said: "The continued tightening of trade restrictions on pubs, which may take another six months, as well as changes in government support would always make it a challenge to reopen some of our pubs.
& # 39; Hence, we made the tough decision not to reopen 79 locations including the 11 Loch Fyne restaurants we announced last week.
"Around a third will be permanently closed and we hope to be able to open the others again in the future."
The Telegraph claimed that in order to gain tighter control over new lockdown measures, Mr. Sunak would like to set up a new committee of himself, Mr. Johnson and Secretary of Health Matt Hancock, to decide which cities to put on high alert.
Such a committee would exclude Mr. Gove, who is believed to be an advocate of restrictions, from the decision-making process.
However, allies of the Chancellor told MailOnline that he "did not dictate who should be on which committee" and did not want the "red" areas to be decided by just three people.
It comes amid growing discontent on Tory benches over the 10 p.m. government curfew on the hospitality industry – with a rebellion expected in a vote next week.
Speculation of further government action increased yesterday when the UK reported 14,542 new coronavirus cases, up nearly 2,000 from the last 24 hours.
The surge has continued after ironing out an artificial thorn caused by a “computer glitch” that left 16,000 cases missed from the government's reporting system.
Test and Trace are still trying to contact 6,000 positive cases to find out who they may have infected – probably around 50,000 people.
Coupled with the growing infection data, yesterday's numbers also showed hospital admissions rose to the highest daily rate in four months.
In another blow to hopes that the virus will be brought under control, official NHS data shows there were 478 new hospital admissions in England on Sunday – the latest daily numbers are in.
This is an increase of 25 percent compared to the data on Saturday, when 386 people with Covid-19 were hospitalized. It's also a four-month high, unseen since June 3rd when the number was 491.
Data also shows that the number of people using ventilators rose from 259 a week ago to 349 on Sunday.
Government data shows that coronavirus cases have increased recently among the older generation
Coronavirus cases are starting to increase in the elderly
Coronavirus cases in the elderly are on the rise again, according to government data.
According to Whitehall sources, the trend is ringing alarm bells, warning that tougher measures may be needed to keep the crisis under control.
Data from Public Health England shows that 30.1 Covid-19 cases were diagnosed out of 100,000 people over the age of 80 last week.
The rate has tripled since the last week of August when it was just 8.9 and has been rising steadily since then. It was 27.5 the week before.
Covid-19 hunts the elderly, with estimates by top scientists killing around one in five over 75-year-olds. For comparison: Experts assume that the mortality rate for people under 45 years of age is below 0.1 percent – for children it is even lower.
PHE data, which takes into account cases diagnosed between September 21-27, shows a similar increase was seen in people in their sixties and seventies.
The infection rate in people aged 70 to 79 is currently 20.6 compared to 17.4 the week before and 4.6 at the end of August.
For people aged 60 to 69, it is now 34.2, up from 27.5 last week. It has more than quadrupled since the figure of 7.5 a month ago.
Cases have risen for every age group since last week except for those under 10, for whom rates appear to have stabilized. Twenty are still driving the outbreak (95.0 out of 81.2), followed by 10 to 19 year olds (76.7 out of 53.7).
The Covid-19 infection data for the past week will be released by PHE this Friday when the government-led agency updates its national surveillance report.
While hospital admissions have increased, the number of people dying from the virus in hospital remains significantly lower than it was when the pandemic began.
In addition, the figures show that hospital admissions rates are still low in some areas, such as the south of England.
The recent surge in cases has been particularly acute in the major cities of the north and the Midlands. Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle and Nottingham saw large increases, partly due to the return of university students.
Plans for a new three-tier system to combat local outbreaks that could close pubs, restaurants and cinemas in parts of England are currently being finalized.
These are expected to be unveiled next week but could be brought forward by the end of this week if current trends continue.
Officials have also refused to rule out further national measures.
In a sign of an imminent crackdown, Mr. Sunak reportedly drew up plans yesterday evening for renewed aid from the Treasury Department to businesses affected by new local lockdown restrictions.
This could be a new support package for those who are forced to close.
Last minute yesterday the leaders of Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Newcastle called on ministers to think carefully about new lockdown measures.
In a letter to Mr Hancock, the four said they were "extremely concerned about the surge in" new coronavirus cases in their areas.
However, they cautioned against supporting further economic lockdowns, urging him to hand over powers to regional leaders rather than impose restrictions on Whitehall.
Judith Blake, Leeds City Council Chair, Joe Anderson, Mayor of Liverpool, Sir Richard Leese, Manchester City Council Chair, and Nick Forbes, Newcastle City Council Chair, wrote: – clock rule, are counterproductive.
"Instead, local measures, developed jointly by the police, law enforcement and public health services, should be adopted to tackle rising infection rates based on local knowledge."
Speaking to ITV's GMB this morning, Mr Anderson said, “We have seen 2,500 new cases in Liverpool in the past week and yet we are seeing restrictions imposed on Manchester and Newcastle that are not working and the rate of infection is rising.
“It's about common sense, about finding the right balance and what we can do, what we should do and how local lockdowns work, and working with local executives to get it right.
"There's a lack of consistency, a lack of clarity, but most of all, a lack of communication and collaboration."
Officials also expect Nottingham to lock down in some cases after a surge.
The city's infection rate has increased. In the seven days leading up to October 2, 1,273 new cases were recorded – that's 382 cases per 100,000. That's an increase of 59 per 100,000 in the seven days leading up to September 25th.
Nottingham Public Health Director Alison Challenger said current restrictions "are no longer enough to stop the virus from spreading".
Other areas with high rates are Knowsley and Liverpool, while Newcastle upon Tyne, Sheffield and Leeds have seen big jumps in their infection rates over the past seven days.
MPs support the six-in-commons rule with just 17 politicians speaking out against it despite widespread Tory anger over the coronavirus law. They fear that they "do more harm than good".
MPs overwhelmingly backed the controversial rule of six in a Commons vote last night – but Boris Johnson had no doubt about the anger on the Tory back benches.
The The Covid-19 regulations that enforce the rules of gatherings in England were passed in Westminster by 287 votes to 17 – a majority of 270.
The rules are already in place and the motion only provides an ex post vote on them.
But a number of Tories said they would abstain rather than support, and used the debate beforehand to attack government ministers over the scope of the rules.
Steve Baker, a former Brexit minister, said he had "real concerns" about the "appalling" cost of the measures, while Sir Graham Brady, chairman of the influential 1922 Tory backbench committee, called the measures "a massive encroachment on." the measures "denoted the private life of the British people.
Huw Merriman MP, chairman of the Transport Select Committee, said he feared the measures would "do more harm than good".
However, there was little prospect that the measures would fail the Commons vote after Labor leader Sir Keir Starmer told reporters on Tuesday that his party would support the measures.
Presenting his opposition to the vote, Mr Baker said: “I have real concerns about the very high cost of these measures.
"(It's an) absolutely appalling set of costs that people bear, and the anecdotes that (will) now increasingly suggest poor compliance actually seem to create a gap between their intentions to comply and what they actually do to have."
He added, “It is not now clear that the benefits outweigh the costs of the lockdown. We have to ask ourselves whether these circumstances are really what we want.
“We hear from people who are destroyed by this lockdown, strong, confident people, open-minded people, sociable people who are destroyed and reduced to repeated tears on the phone.
"This is a devastating social impact on our society, and I believe that people would make different choices if they could take responsibility for themselves."
Mr Brady, who voted against the Rule of Six, said: “These rules are a massive encroachment on the freedom and privacy of the entire British people and also have a devastating economic impact that will result in great job losses and masses of business failure. & # 39;
Last week Boris Johnson hinted that the rule of six could be suspended on Christmas Day to ensure a family of five can invite both grandparents out for festive lunches.
He had stressed that the government would "do everything possible to ensure that Christmas is as normal as possible for everyone".
In late September, a desperate Prime Minister called on the British to "save Christmas" by following his rule of six.
However, in Tuesday's debate, Mr. Baker was joined by other Tory MPs who were fully opposed to the measure.
Bexhill Tory MP Huw Merriman warned that the measure would "do more harm than good".
He said, “Now I am looking for this evidence, but I still don't see it.
On that basis, I fear that I will not be able to vote for the rule of six because I simply do not believe that it is proportionate and that it will actually do what the government hopes, and I hope and fear that it actually does more harm than good. & # 39;
Yesterday some experts called for stricter restrictions.
Chris Hopson, head of the NHS Providers hospital group, urged Boris Johnson to be ready "to put appropriately strict local lockdown measures in place wherever the virus spreads in a way that could jeopardize the NHS 'ability to cope".
Sir Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust, tweeted, “Community broadcasting is increasing. The number of people who need to be hospitalized is increasing.
& # 39; Tragically, more people are dying. Options for intervention could be discussed, but the data are clear. & # 39;
Yesterday MPs overwhelmingly backed the controversial rule of six in a vote today – but Boris Johnson had no doubt about the anger on the Tory back benches.
However, in last night's debate, Mr Baker was joined by other Tory MPs who were fully opposed to the measure.
He said, “I don't see any evidence how this will bring Covid down rates.
“My main concern is that we rule by consent. We need people to come with us.
“When people look at these rules, people I speak to who were absolutely religious supporters of the lockdown, now they say that I just won't do this anymore.
"And the concern is that they are not following some of the other rules that make sense that we should have."
He added, “Now I am looking for this evidence, but I still don't see it.
On that basis, I fear that I will not be able to vote for the rule of six because I simply do not believe that it is proportionate and that it will actually do what the government hopes, and I hope and fear that it actually does more harm than good.
Universities cancel classroom courses
By Chris Brooke
Universities started canceling classroom teaching yesterday as they stepped up efforts to contain rising infection rates on campus.
The University of Manchester and Manchester Metropolitan University, which has around 73,000 students attending, said classes would only be online until at least November.
The University of Sheffield, home to nearly 30,000 students, followed suit last night when it announced that in-person learning will be suspended from Friday until at least October 19.
The University of Manchester (pictured) and Manchester Metropolitan University – with around 73,000 students – said classes would only be online until at least November
The measures are a drastic step to stop the coronavirus from spreading among the student population. However, they will increase the requirements on students to receive tuition reimbursements.
Student outbreaks make up a large proportion of the total cases in both cities. In Sheffield, where there are two major universities, 808 students tested positive between Monday last week and Sunday. There were a total of 1,532 positive tests in the city during the same period. This means that 53 percent of all positive tests came from students. There appears to be a similar pattern in Manchester, although the evidence from universities there is more limited.
There were 792 positive tests from students at Manchester University between Monday last week and Friday.
Manchester Metropolitan University has not released positive test results to date, although more than 1,500 students in university accommodation are known to be self-isolating and there is a significant outbreak among students. The total number of tests in the city for the same period was 3,055.
If a similar percentage of students at both universities tested positive, they would represent more than 45 percent of Manchester.
David Regan, Director of Public Health at Manchester Council said: “This is the right thing to do and supports our approach of using data and a local approach to contain outbreaks to reduce the possibility of further infection.
"More online teaching protects employees, students, and the wider community about what we want and need."
(tagsToTranslate) Dailymail (t) Nachrichten (t) Coronavirus
White House aides must wear yellow clothes, a surgical mask, and disposable glasses to get anywhere near Trump
McMafia millionaire's £ 10 million real estate empire is revealed


Hayla R.
Izzy Stevenson
Jana Ruth
Sky Destrian
Travis Craig
Film Spotlight
Ultimate Movie Marathon
Album Spotlight
Adam Young Scores
The Fangirl Experience
The Fangirl Mixtape
The League of Literary Gentlemen
Luminous Beings
MBTI Diaries
INTJ Diaries
Meet Cute
So Not Over It
'Til the End of the Line
Like This? Try That
So You're New to...
A Fangirl's Explanation of Love Types
Friday, February 10, 2017 / Unknown / 1 comment
When it comes to complex concepts, language fails us. It especially fails us when we look at the concept of love. English just doesn't do it justice. After all, the Ancient Greeks had many different words for such an important emotion. The main four are Eros, Philia, Storge, and Agape, and I'll be using all types of fandom to describe the distinctions.
1) Eros
Eros is often defined as physical desire. I couldn't think of a better representation of this than Shimoneta: A Boring World Where the Concept of Dirty Jokes Doesn't Exist, an anime that's premise is all about the Japanese government censoring inappropriate material and repressing sexual desire. A group of erotica-terrorists rise up in order to stop them. As one might expect, there are quite a few examples of Eros.
However, Eros isn't always about physical attraction. It is also a desire to appreciate beauty and is the initial draw one might feel for another. If you’ve watched Yuri!!! on Ice, you can't help but be captivated by the various ice skating routines, especially Yuri's performance entitled (you got it) Eros. His movements and the background music captures Eros perfectly.
Eros is also that trembling, fluttering, almost manic feeling a person first gets when he/she falls in love. It’s the love that makes someone lose their appetite and see that other person in an idealistic way. In D.N.Angel, the main character, Daisuke, changes into his alter-ego, Dark, if he so much as gets too close to his crush and feels even a stirring of Eros.
2) Philia
Philia is all about the bromance/womance. It’s the feeling you have for a “brother in arms." Philia is at the heart and soul of Final Fantasy XV. I mean, the game is about four bros on one grand adventure. By the end of the game, the player sees how much the guys appreciate each other and that they're stronger together because they've been through so much.
Philia is also a love that you can choose. In Voltron: Legendary Defender, the Paladins are far, far away from home, so they don’t have their relatives close by. Over the course of the show, they become a team and a family.
Lastly, Philia is all about making a connection through shared experiences. The perfect example of Philia is shown in Kingdom Hearts, which is about Sora's connection with everyone he meets. Philia, and Kingdom Hearts' main message, means that no matter the distance, you hold your friends in your heart. It means that friendship is a power that cannot be rivaled.
3) Storge
Storge is the love of community or family. It’s usually seen as a type of love between a parent and a child. A good example of Storge love is in Saga, an adult graphic novel. Saga’s story centers on the bond of family and the undying love one feels for his/her child. Two parents must risk it all to find a better place for their daughter to live and thrive.
Storge isn’t always about a parent and child. It can also include the love between siblings, just like in Caraval by Stephanie Garber. This novel is about a girl named Scarlett who will doing anything in her power to save her sister. The reader sees just how far Scarlett will go to save her family.
Storge can also be a dutiful kind of affection. An example of this can be seen in the Percy Jackson and the Olympians series by Rick Riordan. Time and again, we are reminded that demigods must complete the tasks of their parents. But this sense of duty to the gods is questioned throughout the series. As the reader continues, he/she realizes that the gods' “lack of affection” isn’t always what it seems.
4) Agape
Agape is the purest form of love because it is unconditional. If a person experiences Agape, they will go to great lengths in order to protect the one they love. I can’t help but think about Joyce Byers in Stranger Things. Once she realizes that her son is missing, she never once gives up the search to find him.
Agape is also a mature love, in that a person loves no matter the circumstances and sees beyond another person's flaws and appearance. This is definitely true of Belle in Beauty and the Beast. She grows to love the Beast for who he is, not for what he looks like.
Finally, Agape is when one is willing to sacrifice his/her own values and desires, even his/her own life, all for the other person or for other people. Final Fantasy X has a few instances of this. (Highlight for spoilers.) Yuna is a summoner tasked with defeating Sin, but in order to do so she must make the ultimate sacrifice for the greater good and give her life to perform the Final Summoning so that she can defeat Sin and restore a temporary peace to Spira. Yuna considers others before herself and will do anything to stop Sin's spiral of death and destruction.
From Eros to Agape, Fandoms are complex and include all versions of love. They deal with a range of emotion and complicated concepts, making it easier for us to understand ourselves and our world.
What other fandoms illustrated the different kinds of love?
anime, Beauty and the Beast, Caraval, DNAngel, Final Fantasy, Final Fantasy X, Final Fantasy XV, Kingdom Hearts, Percy Jackson, Saga, Shimoneta, Stranger Things, Voltron, Voltron Legendary Defender, Yuri!!! On Ice
Jaime February 10, 2017 at 9:35 PM
I LOVE this post. (Pun definitely intended.) It was so fun to read and educational! :)
Hamilton: Myers-Briggs Personality Types
Which Merlin Character Are You? (According to Myers-Briggs Type Indicator)
Parks and Recreation: Myers-Briggs Personality Types
How to Throw a 'Star Wars' Christmas Party
INTJ Diaries: I Love You. Most Ardently.
Blog Archive April (2) March (3) February (3) January (4) December (2) May (3) April (4) March (9) February (7) January (7) December (4) November (12) October (15) September (16) August (32) July (32) June (31) May (32) April (30) March (33) February (29) January (31) December (33) November (31) October (37) September (32) August (32) July (33) June (35) May (40) April (38) March (47) February (41) January (40) December (46) November (43) October (44) September (39) August (32) July (33) June (33) May (34) April (43) March (34) February (33) January (37) December (31) November (8)
Copyright © The Fangirl Initiative | Powered by Blogger


Digital TV News: SatLink
ARABSAT and EMC announce triple play over satellite joint venture
Sep 8, 2015 – ARABSAT and EMC have announced a joint venture to launch TRIO, the first real triple play service over satellite in the world. The TRIO platform is built using SATLink technology from EMC with the soon-to-be launched ARABSAT Badr-7 satellite at the MENA hotspot of 26°E.
News categories: ARABSAT, EMC, TRIO, Khalid Balkheyour, Abel Avellan, Santiago Rossi, Content Distribution, Digital TV, Middle-East, Satellite
SatLink and Pi Telecom to offer Cloud-based TV Everywhere platform
Sep 30, 2014 – SatLink Communications has announced a partnership with Pi Telecom. Through the partnership, SatLink is expanding into the IP delivery market by bringing the best of TV online through the launch of a new End-to-End (E2E) OTT Cloud-based platform.
News categories: SatLink Communications, Pi Telecom, David Hochner, Arie Aig, Content Distribution, Digital TV, OTT, TV Everywhere, Worldwide
SatLink launches Hot Bird DVB-S2 platform for HD in Europe
Apr 7, 2014 – SatLink Communications has announced the launch of a DVB-S2 platform on Eutelsat’s Hot Bird satellite. The service has been developed to meet the growing demand for HD content via satellite.
News categories: SatLink, David Hochner, Content Distribution, Europe, Satellite
SatLink Launches New DTH Platform to Africa on Astra 4A
Apr 19, 2009 – SatLink Communications has announced that it has acquired its own capacity covering sub-Saharan Africa on ASTRA's Astra 4A (Sirius 4) satellite located at 5° East. The MCPC platform is for DTH broadcasters aiming to cover the region.
News categories: SatLink, Africa, Angola, Botswana, Burundi, Cameroon, Congo-Brazzaville, Côte d'Ivoire, Digital TV, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Satellite, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe


Return to History
Robert Taylor was born Spangler Arlington Brugh in Filley, Nebraska on August 5, 1911. The only child of a farmer/physician father and a possessive mother, Taylor excelled in both athletics and the arts. At Beatrice High School, he ran track, played cello in the orchestra and was a skilled orator. Upon graduation, he pursued courses in musicianship at Doane College in Crete, Nebraska where he studied cello under Professor Herbert E. Gray. Taylor so admired his mentor that he followed him to California and enrolled at Pomona College in Los Angeles after his instructor accepted a position there. Bob joined the campus theater group and was eventually spotted by a MGM talent scout.
According to the Internet Movie Database, Taylor “holds the Hollywood record for the longest contract with one studio (MGM), 24 years from early 1934 to late 1958” in addition to holding the Hollywood record for the lowest initial contract salary of $35 a week (1934). Such were the rewards and disappointments of implicit trust and faith in studio chief Louis B. Mayer. Yet despite the career manipulating Mayer, Taylor credited his years at MGM as the happiest period of his professional life.
Taylor’s breakout film was “Magnificent Obsession” opposite Irene Dunne in 1935. His handsome looks and solid dramatic skills made him an instant star and secured his position as the male romantic lead opposite a succession of the era’s most seductive sirens. In later years, Bob’s acting became darker and edgier, allowing him to transition from the musicals and comedies of his earlier career to more dramatic roles in film noir, combat movies, historical epics and westerns.
1936 was a pivotal year for Bob. Barbara Stanwyck, on the heels of a bitter divorce from first husband Frank Fay, had become a Hollywood recluse and friends Marion and Zeppo Marx were concerned. The couple invited her to accompany them to a dinner party at the Trocadero in Hollywood where Taylor was also a guest. Bob and Barbara hit it off immediately. Taylor admired Stanwyck’s professionalism and she his energetic sense of fun. What began as an industry friendship blossomed into romance during Barbara’s years at Marwyck Ranch. By early 1938, Taylor had invested. $50,000 in a ranch of his own just a few miles to the west with a home designed by architect Burton A. Schutt.
Stanwyck and Taylor made two pictures together during the period of their courtship, His Brother’s Wife (1936) and This Is My Affair (1937).
Barbara and Bob's carefree life in the San Fernando Valley was turned upside down when Kirtley Baskette's article, "Hollywood's Unmarried Husbands and Wives" appeared in the January 1939 issue of Photoplay magazine. Taylor and Stanwyck, along with other actors including good friends Gable and Lombard, were exposed as couples living together in unwedded bliss. The article caused a public scandal for the studios. MGM, which had previously squashed Taylor’s romances in a desire to maintain lucrative box office receipts by keeping him “attainable” to his legions of female fans, insisted that Bob and Barbara wed. The two immediately announced their engagement. The civil marriage ceremony took place in a private residence overlooking San Diego Bay shortly after midnight on May 14, 1939.
Following their marriage, Barbara and Bob divested themselves of their respective ranches and moved back to Beverly Hills. Their careers continued to flourish and they were regulars on the Hollywood social scene. Bob was also an avid sportsman who enjoyed hunting, fishing and flying. He named his private Twin Beech airplane “Missy” after Barbara, despite her distaste for flying in small aircraft. The couple were the first to place joint foot and hand prints along with their signatures in a single cement square at Grauman’s Chinese Theater in June of 1941. During World War II, Bob served as a Lieutenant in the United States Naval Air Corps, where he worked as a flight instructor and appeared in instructional films.
Over the years, rumors of Taylor’s extra-marital affairs plagued Bob’s marriage to Barbara and the couple finally divorced on February 25, 1952. Barbara was devastated. As part of their settlement, Barbara was granted 15% of Bob’s gross earnings until she either remarried or died. Despite the acrimony, the two remained friends, starring in their third and final film together, a psychological horror movie titled “The Night Walker” in 1964.
Taylor married German actress Ursula Theiss in 1954 and fathered two children. He lived out his remaining years on a beautiful 112-acre ranch in Mandeville Canyon, an exclusive Brentwood enclave of Los Angeles. Eventually, Bob’s life-long three pack a day cigarette habit caught up with him and he was diagnosed with lung cancer in October of 1968. He died from the disease on June 8, 1969 at the early age of 57. At his funeral, Ronald Reagan, then Governor of California, delivered the eulogy and Barbara Stanwyck was among the mourners.
Robert Taylor’s star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame is located at 1500 Vine Street.


Self-Management and the Remote Workforce at Phrase
Remote work has become the new normal as we practice physical distancing amid the current pandemic. Phrase would like to share its collective experience in this new situation in the hope that it may be useful to colleagues, customers, vendors, and fellow start-up community members.
Here at Phrase, like most workplaces on the planet, remote has become a new normal as we practice physical distancing. Though the duration of this unprecedented pandemic is unknown, remote working is not. We were able to build upon several learnings from the past, but (like most companies) we have never been 100% remote before. We’d like to share our collective experience in the hope that it may be useful to our colleagues, customers, vendors, and fellow start-up community members.
Learnings From Our “Daily Checkout” Poll
First Impressions After the First Two Weeks of Working From Home
Motivation (Put Your Pants On)
Work Setup
Scattered Teams Require Autonomous Decision Making: Introducing Holacracy
The Longer Term: Work in Progress
One of the techniques we’re using to manage the new challenges of working in a remote environment is through a daily poll created by our HR circle. The goal is to gain insights on everyone’s remote learning curves, as well as the overall home office morale, and to share experiences and discoveries that help us function as a team, regardless of location. Let’s look at some of this feedback.
We’re only a few weeks into this change but certain feedback was consistent across the board, including how people were feeling about this big adjustment:
Individual productivity is perceived as high, rated 6.0 out of 7;
Morale in home office is positive, rated 5.9 out of 7.
Considering the amount of uncertainty everyone is facing right now, the fact that we as a company seem to be adapting to changes easily without major obstacles is considered especially positive. It can be difficult to cope when everything is turned upside down. It helps to know work is stable to keep up the morale.
When you are working solo, after being in a collaborative face-to-face office environment, self-motivation becomes far more critical. Going into the office automatically puts you in work mode, but at home, you have to shift gears. There was a lot of feedback and tips on making this shift:
Getting started was important. Entering ‘work mode’, getting dressed and creating a morning routine.
Creating a structure was also important. Many responses were about setting up a proper workspace, scheduling the day, and generally creating a work-focused atmosphere.
A lot of responses were also sharing personal rituals. E.g. music playlists dedicated to working hours, making coffee to take into your home office every day at the same time, moving around with specific rooms for different tasks.
It all adds up to setting a stage, physically and mentally, for being at ‘the office’.
When you can’t walk down the hall or into a coworker’s office to ask a quick question or for help with an issue, your ability to work efficiently is different. The good news is the communication tools and processes we use at the office were already optimized for remote work:
Slack provides an ‘always on’ channel that helps us feel connected in real-time. It also serves as an excellent way to share files and to manage various team activities by organizing threads by subject.
Email is primarily a communication medium for more complex messages and for connecting with customers, vendors, and other outside resources.
Conferencing software like Google Hangouts is the meeting medium, and the tools it provides for screen-sharing, timing meetings and preserving a record are invaluable. It was also mentioned a lot to help with isolation and keeping up with coworkers socially while working together.
Remote communication offers both challenges and benefits. When you are communicating via technology, keeping things brief and to the point becomes more important. This seems to make meetings more productive. At the same time, lots of writing and Slack messages leave room for interpretation and misunderstanding and sometimes can get lost in workload. To us, talking always beats writing when troubleshooting, resolving personnel issues, doing one-on-ones, and working through more strategic considerations.
We’ve become more aware of the amount of time spent in an office that is not focused on the task at hand. While working at home has its own set of interruptions and distractions to handle, many people miss ‘the distractions’ of the office. Those ‘distractions’, such as colleagues sharing stories from the weekend or discussing a difficult situation with a customer, can create a team mindset. By far, the most mentioned aspects of the workdays at home revolved around interactions with the team and experiencing a newly created team spirit of being in this together. New ways to interact were created through dedicated slack channels, sharing of photos, virtual coffee or lunch dates and other initiatives from the team.
We also always love to hear and read about other company’s experiences and experiments with new ways to keep up the morale and feeling of belonging. Let us all continue to share ideas and inspire each other.
Our polling also identified some areas that need improvement. The majority of comments about necessary improvements were linked to:
Hardware issues: There have been some transition issues with equipment like headsets and monitors.
Ergonomics: Home offices are not as ergonomic as at work; getting things like decent desks, chairs, and lighting is important to productivity and staying healthy.
After the first days, we offered to take home office hardware, which solved most of the hardware issues. Nevertheless, we are considering what kind of equipment and office supply support we can add. A lot of this depends on the duration of the crisis and our plans for a post-coronavirus world. Taking care of ergonomics and staying healthy these days is more difficult, but it is very cool to see how necessity really is the mother of invention. Several team members reported self- built stand-up desks, timers to remember regular movement and taking breaks to exercise.
Along with these learnings on an individual level, the current situation really invites us to also create new understandings on an organizational level (#newwork). Working remotely and independently magnifies the need for greater self-direction since mechanisms of instruction and control become less important and less efficient. Following Holacracy, we have developed what we believe to be a unique perspective on how our self-management system is helping us to manage these necessary transitions.
Holacracy is a management system that seeks to empower our team members to make their own decisions when facing problems. It encourages everyone in the organization to take charge. It also provides an ideal framework for working remotely, with clearly defined roles and responsibilities as well as useful communication protocols in order to keep meetings concise and useful.
Self-management, which Holacracy requires a high degree of, is based on the idea that each person in an organization is responsible to fill their roles and strive to reach the best results in the frame the organization has defined for the role. As its creator, Brian Robertson, puts it, this changes the primary functions of the team managers in a self-managed business:
Keeping things moving – by monitoring work, inspiring motivation, and removing obstacles.
Creating clarity – by defining who does what, who has the authority to make which decisions, and what priorities the team should focus on.
Improving alignment – by making sure team members are all pulling in the same direction.
Inviting trust – by creating a space in which people feel emotionally and psychologically safe to express their creativity.
Liberating and empowering – by giving people space and freedom to get work done and the authority to do so.
Contrary to classical hierarchical structures, roles, responsibilities, and even team structures are all but static. Every team member has the power to change the system, change the rules for their domains and communicate obstacles as well as improvements freely across the organization. In order for this to not end up in anarchy, there are clarified discussion and integration rules for these changes with a focus on enabling change, reducing discussion and moving things forward.
We’ve been working with Holacracy since 2016, which proves to be a valuable asset these days. Our teams at Phrase work to follow the mentioned principles and it enables us to quickly adjust to changing circumstances.
Of course, no framework is perfect, and it all comes with a price. To just share one learning here, we quickly realized that for us following Holacracy lacked transparent cross-team alignment. We, therefore, added a quarterly OKR (objectives and key results) process to align forces and reflect our shared responsibility across teams towards reaching our common goals.
Uncertainty can be uncomfortable, but there is also opportunity in crisis, as the Chinese saying goes. We’ll certainly be looking to learn from this situation and take it as an experiment to prepare for future disruptions. We’re also refining our self-management protocols to support this new remote working world. It’s a work in progress, but it’s progress.
Authored by Mariana. Last updated on April 8th, 2020 .
The Ultimate Guide to Localization Management
Find out all you need to know about localization from start to finish with our ultimate guide
Check out the guide
Must-Read Software Development Blogs
The Best Libraries for React I18n
A Step-by-Step Guide to JavaScript Localization
The Ultimate Guide: Node.js Internationalization (I18n)
The Ultimate Symfony Tutorial on Internationalization
Subscribe to our mailing list to keep up with best practices for localization, new features, and updates from Phrase.


The Canons of Dort as a Standard for Teaching and Preaching (2)
Arjen Vreugdenhil
In a previous article I pointed out that the Canons of Dort not only define the content of Reformed doctrine, but also direct the way in which it is taught and preached. In this article I will address section I of the Canons, and draw conclusions about the way we ought to speak about God’s work of election.
Election in Broader Context
The first section of the Canons is about election, but this is only brought up in section I.6. The first few articles of section I outline more foundational principles of Christian doctrine; and we see this pattern repeated at the beginning of the other sections.
There are several reasons for choosing this approach. By taking its starting point in basic Christian doctrine, the Canons emphasize that the Reformed churches are not sectarian, but stand fully in the tradition of the Christian church. By beginning with common ground, the polemic with the Arminians also becomes less militant.
But most importantly, the introductory articles I.1-6 show us the proper context in which we must think about election. The doctrines of sin, Christ, gospel, and faith take priority over the doctrine of election. In election, God chose people from the sinful, human race. Election is in Jesus Christ. Election is no direct ticket to heaven, but predestination to be in Christ, and to be saved in the way of faith in the gospel.
In this way the Synod of Dort defused the first main complaint against the Reformed, namely, that they teach that God predestines people to heaven or hell “without the least regard or consideration of any sin.”[1] People perish eternally because of their sin and unbelief; people inherit eternal life through faith in Jesus Christ. Contrary to the Arminian accusation, sin and the obedience of faith are central in the Reformed doctrine!
I frequently meet Reformed believers who will suspect anyone of being “Arminian” if he begins his gospel presentation with John 3:16, in God’s love for the world. It is true that some evangelicals take this text too far, and declare God’s saving love for every individual, whether they believe or not. But note that our very own Canons of Dort start with John 3:16—in his love for the world, God gave Christ. This merciful gospel must be preached to all, so that people may believe. And God, based on his eternal decree of election, will give faith precisely to those he has chosen. Do you see how evangelistic the Canons are from the very beginning?
Speaking of Reprobation
Article I.15 addresses the dark side of predestination. If God elects some to receive Christ and his benefits, there will be others to whom this is not given. They will perish in their unbelief.
According to the Remonstrants this was a terrible, cruel doctrine. They complained that the Reformed made “reprobation the cause of unbelief and ungodliness, in the same manner in which election is the source and cause of faith and good works.”[2] This would make God the cause and “author” of sin.
To be fair, there were some Reformed ministers who drew this conclusion. The Synod of Dort even dealt with a seminary professor, Maccovius, who taught that “God wills and decrees sin” and that “he predestines people to sin.” Maccovius was not declared a heretic, but he was strongly reprimanded to tone down his teaching. Even those who did not agree with Maccovius would conclude that, at the very deepest level of God’s decree, God must be the ultimate cause of sin. After all, he created people, he allowed them to fall, and by electing some to be saved, he implicitly allowed others to die in their sins.[3]
The Canons do not give an explanation of the origin of sin; the reality of sin is simply assumed throughout, starting explicitly in article I.1. And article I.15 ends with a serious warning, intended to keep our thinking and speaking straight. Never, ever are we to think of God as the cause, the author of sin.
The decree of reprobation, say the Canons, is no more than this: that God decided to leave the non-elect precisely where they are, by their own fault, in the guilt and misery of sin.[4] He does not make them sin. He does not prevent them from believing. He simply gives them what they (and we, if it were not for God’s grace!) want in their rebellion.
The Canons make it abundantly clear: people do not go to hell because God forces them to go there. People go to hell because they are guilty and do not believe in Jesus Christ. Is it unfair that God permits them to become lost? Article I.18 answers with a sharp but loving rebuke to those who complain: if anything is unfair, it is our election! Everybody deserves hell, and our election to faith and salvation is undeserved.
The first section of the Canons ends with praise to God for his deep council, which we cannot understand. It points us to Romans 9, which teaches that God has the basic right to do with his creation as he wants, like a Potter with his clay.
Today there are Calvinists who like to start with this principle, that God is sovereign and therefore has the right to cast into hell whoever he wants. They believe that this is a “higher,” better view than that presented in the Canons.[5] It is this kind of teaching of unmitigated divine sovereignty that evoked the Arminian complaint that the Reformed doctrine is no different than Islam.[6] But the Canons start with the revealed gospel of grace in a sinful world. The teaching of God’s sovereignty is for those who would talk back to God who justly punishes rebellion.
Election, Assurance, and Comfort
Several articles toward the end of section I of the Canons spell out important pastoral consequences of election. Christians who are aware that their faith is a gracious gift can easily worry: how can I be sure that God has chosen me? How do I know my faith is real? Sadly, there are entire denominations where this anxiety overshadows all of the Christian life, and only very few are assured of their salvation.
The Canons do not want us to think this way, and certainly not to teach this pious-sounding doubt. Article I.12 gives a careful, sensitive answer. Believers, as they grow in faith, will receive assurance of their election. Not by some private insight in God’s secret council. Not by a miraculous experience. But “by noticing within themselves, with spiritual joy and holy delight the unmistakable fruits of election pointed out in God’s Word”: faith, awe and trust in God, sorrow for sin, desire to be righteous.
What about those who lack this assurance? As a result of sin we can feel so guilty, so much lacking in godliness, that we may fear that God has not chosen us. Canons I.16 comforts us that we should not “be alarmed at the mention of reprobation, nor count ourselves among the reprobate.” This article point us to the mercy of God. It shows the way of growth and perseverance in the Christian life; I will address this at the end of my next article, where we look at section V of the Canons.
The pastoral approach of the Canons is balanced; articles I.13 and 16 also address the opposite problem of presumption and antinomianism. There are people who are not serious about their faith, but claim to be elect in spite of an uncaring, ungodly life. It even says that such false assurance “usually happens to those who casually take for granted the grace of election” and “are unwilling to walk in the ways of the chosen.”
The Question of Dying Infants
Believing parents care about the salvation of their children. One particularly pressing question is what we may believe about our children if they die at a very young age. At the time when the Canons were written, infant mortality was extremely high, due to warfare, pestilence, and other factors. But even today, when most infants survive after birth, many parents look for comfort after a miscarriage.
The Arminians made this question a focus in their campaign against the Reformed doctrine. As I mentioned in the previous article, they accused the Reformed churches of teaching that “many children of the faithful are torn, guiltless, from their mothers’ breasts, and tyrannically plunged into hell” (by God).
The delegates at the Synod of Dort had to address this question. They did so, briefly but powerfully, in Article I.17.
We may believe that children of believers who die at an early age belong to God’s elect. There is no reason for doubt, because God himself speaks favorably about the children in the Scriptures. The Canons give two arguments. First of all, there is the covenant, which continues from parents to children and is only broken by deliberate unbelief at older age. Second, there is the declaration in 1 Cor. 7:14 that children of believers are holy. This does not automatically mean that all children of believers are elect, and saved no matter what; but it does imply that these children are special to God. If he takes them to himself at a young age, there is no reason to doubt his covenant mercy.
In fact, article I.17 says very much the same as the traditional Reformed form for the administration of baptism to infants.
Throughout the centuries this article has been controversial in Reformed circles, especially in those experiential churches who were hesitant to lay hold of the assurance of faith. The Canons of Dort also clearly go beyond the Westminster Standards in this respect, which only teach that elect infants will be saved, even though they have not believed (WCF 10.3). But where the church received this article as a faithful reflection of the covenant promise, it has been of great comfort to many parents.
Teaching Election Properly
We have seen that section I of the Canons is evangelistic and pastoral. It also exhibits great pedagogical qualities, as a guide for preaching and teaching. If we are to preach on predestination, let it always be in the context of sin, Christ, and gospel, as shown in Articles I.1-6! If we are to preach on election, let us give comfort to the afflicted and warning to the presumptive! If we are to preach on reprobation, let us endeavor never to suggest that God is the author of sin, but admire the justice and wisdom of God even when we do not comprehend him!
Article I.14 gives explicit instruction about how to teach the doctrine of election. This doctrine was taught throughout the history of the church, in Old and New Testament, and so it must be taught today. But it is very important how this teaching takes place. Article I.14 is not only a warning against not preaching election; it is also a warning against improper teaching of it. The Canons list a number of qualities our teaching of election should have.
First of all, the doctrine of election is “specifically intended” for God’s church, to comfort believers. It is not the first (or even second) aspect of Christian doctrine to bring to unbelievers! For many zealous Calvinists that may seem wrong, especially if they are eager to combat Arminianism in all its forms. But the Canons are following the Biblical example here: the Bible speaks about election almost exclusively in the context of God’s people, whether Old Testament Israel or the New Testament church.
Second, the Canons call for discretion and a godly and holy attitude. Because the doctrine of election can raise difficult questions, and can be distorted into a false denial of assurance or presumptive complacency, we must be very careful how to present it. Articles I.12, 13, 16, and 17 list some pastoral considerations that should be taken into account.
Third, the Canons tells us that election must be preached “at the appropriate time and place.” This should be understood as the proper time and place in the preaching and teaching curriculum. For instance, the Heidelberg Catechism speaks of election in Lord’s Days 20 and 21, and when teaching these questions and answers a teacher should explain election. Likewise, election must have a place in sermons about Deut. 7, Rom. 9, and Eph. 1. But neither the Bible nor the catechism speaks about election all the time, and neither should we.
Fourth, in the preaching and teaching of election we must be careful to bring glory to God, “without inquisitive searching into the ways of the Most High.” Practically, this means that we echo the clear teaching of the Bible that God has chosen for himself a people, to save them in the way of faith; but we must refrain from speculation on the details which are not clearly revealed.
Some argue that election is one of the most foundational doctrines of the Bible, and must therefore figure in most sermons. One Reformed minister wrote, for instance:
If the question be asked, ‘What place does Scripture allot to the truth of election?’ the answer is: ‘First place.’ The truth of election is of prime importance. … Take it away, and the whole body of the truth dies. For there is not a single element of the entire truth of Holy Scripture that can stand ultimately without the truth of sovereign election. … Even while the church is busy with the task of proclaiming in the narrower sense of the word such truths as vicarious atonement, regeneration, or conversion, for example, that truth of election will pulsate regularly and strongly through the preaching. If it does not, then the truth of election is being deprived of its proper time and place.[7]
It even seems that Canons I.9 support this view, when it calls election the “source of every saving good”.
But this view is mistaken. God’s decree (including election) comes first in the logical and historical order; but that does not mean that it is the central element in God’s revelation. Scripture tells us clearly that the center of revelation is Jesus Christ and his ministry. The Bible calls to faith in Christ much more than it speaks of election. In fact, even our election is in Christ (Eph. 1:4). Likewise, in the very definition of election, the Canons define Christ as the foundation of salvation (I.7).
To be sure, the truth of God’s electing grace may not be obscured or denied. It is a tremendous source of comfort for the believer. But this doctrine must take its proper place, so that Jesus Christ, the greatest Word of God to a sinful world, remains at the center.
The same guiding principle is found in the remaining sections of the Canons. I will address this in the next and last article of this series.
[1] See the “Conclusion” of the Canons of Dort for this accusation. The full text of the Remonstrant complaint is this: “Some [Reformed churches teach] that God by an eternal and unchangeable decree, out of the people whom he did not view as created and much less as fallen, ordained some to eternal life, some to eternal perdition, without any consideration of righteousness or sin, obedience or disobedience, merely because he was pleased to display the glory of his justice and mercy, or—as others formulate it—his saving grace, wisdom and sovereignty.”
[2] See the “Conclusion” to the Canons.
[3] See, for example, the Synopsis Purioris Theologiae, which was published in 1625 by four leading Reformed professors. Also, in his dissertation, The Issue of Reprobation at the Synod of Dort (1618-19) in Light of the History of this Doctrine (1985), D. Sinnema discusses the many ways in which Arminian and Reformed theologians alike attempted to parse out the difficult doctrine of election without putting the blame on God.
[4] The last paragraph of I.15, “And this is the decree of reprobation …” must be understood in a limiting sense. This, and nothing else or more, is the decree of reprobation.
[5] E.g., Homer Hoeksema, The Voice of Our Fathers
[6] The “Conclusion” of the Canons summarizes the Arminian complaint that “this teaching … is nothing but a refurbished … Turkism.” Mainstream Muslim doctrine has many tenets of hyper-Calvinism: A hard determinism, combined with the view that Allah is absolutely sovereign, and even the most faithful believers can only hope that he will be merciful to them.
[7] Homer Hoeksema, The Voice of Our Fathers, 231.
Arjen Vreugdenhil was born and raised in the Netherlands where he earned his M.Sc. from the Free University of Amsterdam in Mathematics. He moved to Michigan in 2003 and taught Physics at Grand Valley State University. Afterward he completed his M.Div. at Mid-America Reformed Seminary. He is a member of the United Reformed Churches in North America. He and his wife Jodi have three young boys.
PrevPreviousThe Canons of Dort as a Standard for Teaching and Preaching
NextThe Canons of Dort as a Standard for Teaching and Preaching (3)Next
Dort’s Study Bible: Colossians 2:8 and Philosophy
Daniel Ragusa	March 11, 2020
These [pagan] philosophers in their appearance of wisdom [schijnwijsheid] had only imagined things about God and about the way to the supreme good, which these teachers would mix with the Gospel, as do also the scholastic teachers in the Papacy, whereby the simplicity and straightforwardness of the saving doctrine of the Gospel is considerably darkened and distorted.
Karl Barth and the “Word-of-Godness” of Scripture
James J. Cassidy	February 19, 2020
I often receive questions about Barth’s views on the Bible, which admittedly is a challenging topic. According to Karl Barth, the Bible is not revelation.
Van Til and the Creator-Creature Relation
Camden M. Bucey	February 17, 2020
On February 7, 1951, Cornelius Van Til wrote an insightful letter to neo-evangelical theologian Carl F. H. Henry. While it was written sixty-nine years ago,
The Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy and the Spirit of Schleiermacher
James J. Cassidy	February 3, 2020
It is a great strength of our Presbyterian and Reformed ethos that we are historically conscious. We enjoy history and pride ourselves on being self-consciously rooted in
The Two Popes, Rahner, and Divine Immutability
Camden M. Bucey	January 15, 2020
I recently watched The Two Popes, a film written by Anthony McCarten and directed by Fernando Meirelles available on Netflix. The movie recounts the relationship


Winter Park Perspective
Commentary by Pete Weldon
Commuter Rail Update – Fall 2008
Posted on October 29, 2008 3:28 pm by Peter Weldon
(Originally sent to the Winter Park City Commission September 18, 2008)
(Commissioner Beth Dillaha attempted to terminate the commuter rail agreement with Orange County on January 26, 2009 (pg 10). The vote failed 3 to 2.)
The facts and circumstances included here relating to the commuter rail agreement between the City of Winter Park and Orange County have been reviewed for accuracy with the Winter Park City Manager. The opinions expressed here are of course mine and mine alone.
Commissioner Beth Dillaha’s commuter rail presentation at the September 8, 2008 City Commission meeting re-addressed known risks and possible costs associated with the commuter rail system as they impact the City of Winter Park and its citizens. Beth’s stated goal is to seek a renegotiation of the existing commuter rail agreement with Orange County so we get a better deal.
Given no material changes in commuter rail circumstances at either the County or City level since the agreement was entered into, it is certain that Orange County will not renegotiate. It is of interest to note that the people instigating, supporting, and encouraging Beth’s call for a renegotiation are those with the stated desire, and continuous, strident intention to kill Winter Park’s participation in the commuter rail system, not to “renegotiate” that participation. I can easily presume these people intend to use the County’s certain refusal to renegotiate as fodder to call for the City’s withdrawal from the existing commitment. All this makes me wonder whom Beth believes she was elected to represent.
While this effort at “renegotiation” is a painfully transparent political charade to undermine the City’s commitment to participation in the commuter rail system it is nonetheless always useful to review the substance of the existing agreement as it impacts the City of Winter Park and its residents.
The entire central Florida community has agreed to take on the challenges and risks of creating a commuter rail service. This includes the governments of Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, County of Volusia, and the City of Orlando; with the cities of Maitland and Winter Park having agreed to share responsibilities assumed by Orange County. The Maitland and Winter Park commuter rail agreements with Orange County are identical in all material respects, including cost sharing and the opt out clause effective seven years from the date fare paying service begins.
To my knowledge the City of Winter Park is the only party to these agreements that asked its citizens to provide permission to construct a station and pay for the construction and operating costs. A majority of Winter Park voters said, “yes” with full involvement of activists on both sides of the issue delineating the possible costs and risks, benefits and opportunities. Winter Park is the only community that exercised the full democratic process on this issue and the voters said, “yes.”
Let’s get some important context out of the way.
· The City of Winter Park has no control over whether this regional commuter rail system is built and operated on tracks and right of ways running through our city.
· Commuter rail trains will be coming through Winter Park.
· Orange County has executed an agreement that commits all Orange County residents to assume responsibility for certain capital and net operating costs of the commuter rail system whether trains stop in Winter Park, or not.
· The City of Winter Park has no control over commuter rail obligations assumed by Orange County.
Beth’s presentation emphasized the possibility the City will be bearing uncertain high levels of costs and risks in support of its participation in the commuter rail system. Let’s looks more closely at these costs and risks (paragraphs 5.2 a, b, and c of the agreement between Orange County and the City of Winter Park).
Capital Costs:
Winter Park is obligated to pay all capital costs related to the development of the Winter Park station. The City has been proceeding with FDOT on plans to construct the Winter Park commuter rail station based on prior assurances that $3,000,000 in federal funds will be available to the City for this purpose. (The $4,300,000 number Beth used in her presentation represents the total funding request made by the City in case more dollars may be available for improvements outside the commuter rail right of way.) The City expects to provide $375,000 in matching funds. All information to date indicates that station plans approved by the City Commission can be completed within the minimum $3,000,000 in expected federal funds. The FDOT Winter Park project update dated August 11, 2008 states that FDOT expects to secure a “full funding grant agreement” from the Federal Transit Administration by “mid 2009.”
Like Beth, I am concerned that we do not yet understand whether federal funds will be forthcoming or whether FDOT will assume costs expended up to the time that availability or unavailability of such funds is known for certain. Accordingly, as a citizen I would like to see:
· Confirmation that FDOT intends to negotiate a “full funding grant agreement” from the Federal Transit Administration by “mid 2009” that includes a commitment of at least $3,000,000 to be available to defray design and construction costs for the Winter Park commuter rail station, among other possible and permitted Winter Park uses.
· Confirmation that the City of Winter Park is not responsible for costs expended by FDOT on planning for construction of the Winter Park commuter rail station whether or not a funding agreement is eventually secured, beyond those FDOT costs that may be covered under a funding agreement.
In any event, the Termination paragraph 6.2(b) in the commuter rail agreement with Orange County allows the City to terminate if sufficient funding to construct the station is not forthcoming from either federal or state government. (There are some timing issues here that may warrant clarification from counsel and city management.)
In her presentation Beth raised the question of whether the City would be obligated to refund any or all funds used to pay for Capital cost obligations in the event the City exercises its “opt-out” clause with Orange County. (This is the $3,000,000 in expected federal money to come through FDOT to fund construction of the Winter Park station.) I understand there has also been formal public mention of a possible reserve in anticipation of some type of refunding requirement. I suggest this is a slippery slope to go down and that it is counter to the interests of the City to do so. I suggest the City Commission seek opinion of counsel on this issue. It would be counter to City interests to execute any agreement with a Capital refunding requirement in the absence of similar pre-existing Capital refunding agreements involving all other entities receiving federal funds related to the commuter rail system. It would also be counter to City interests to presume such a liability exists in the absence of pre-existing agreements with Capital refunding requirements involving all other entities receiving federal funds related to the commuter rail system.
Local Operating Support Costs and Debt Service Costs
The City of Winter Park is not responsible for Local Operating Support Costs during the FDOT funding period, which is seven years from the date of the first fare paying service. After that time, the City of Winter Park is responsible for 100% of the Local Operating Support Costs. These costs are shared based on relative passenger boarding by station under a formula set in the Master Interlocal Agreement to which Orange County is a party. For example, if the Winter Park station has 5% of boardings as defined then the City of Winter Park would be responsible for roughly 5% of the total costs of operating the entire system net of fare and other revenues. Orange County has agreed to refund 30% of these costs to the City.
The City of Winter Park is not responsible for Debt Service costs during the FDOT funding period. After that time, the City of Winter Park is responsible for 100% of the Debt Service costs. These costs pay off debt undertaken to construct the system and are shared based on track mileage within each entities boundaries as a portion of total track mileage of the entire system. The formula is set in the Master Interlocal Agreement to which Orange County is a party. Orange County has agreed to refund 30% of these costs to the City.
Beth brought up the issue of double taxation (paying as both Winter Park and Orange County residents). I too was concerned about this issue but find the reality is subtler than the point made in Beth’s presentation. Under the existing agreement Orange County is picking up 30% of the operating and debt service costs allocated to Winter Park based on boardings and track mileage as defined in the Master Agreement. This 30% and all the other costs assumed by Orange County will be spread across all Orange County taxpayers, including Winter Park taxpayers. The right issue to focus on is whether or not the actual operating and debt service costs directly assumed by Winter Park combined with remaining Orange County costs assumed by Winter Park taxpayers represents a fair value for the City and its residents.
This fair value assessment must include consideration of the costs and risks as well as the benefits and opportunities, a necessary dynamic not included in Beth’s considerations. Beth’s focus on costs is a canard, and an old argument the voters rejected. Projecting numbers for costs and risks in a vacuum that excludes the benefits and opportunities does not serve the interests of the City and its residents (buts certainly bolsters the ambitions of those intent to kill the Winter Park commuter rail station). Beth’s cost projections are irrelevant as uncertainties about actual costs are addressed in the existing commuter rail agreement through the opt-out clause.
The Opt-Out Clause
Beth’s September 8 presentation questioned the strength of the opt-out clause language. This clause is the lynchpin protecting the interests of the City and its residents. As such, it is productive to re-address the implications of this language with counsel to reassure us that the City has the right to withdraw from the commuter rail system with protection from Local Operating Support Costs and Debt Service cost obligations beyond any opt-out date should a dedicated funding source not be secured.
It is important to note that we would not entirely escape Local Operating Support Costs and Debt Service costs related to the Winter Park station in the event of an opt-out, even though the station would cease to operate. Orange County would still need to pay for costs formerly paid by the City to the extent such costs are not allocated to other station partners. A portion of this burden would continue to be borne by Winter Park residents through additional County level taxation.
Beth’s stated goal in her September 8th presentation is to renegotiate the commuter rail agreement with Orange County in a way that results in a better and more secure financial position for the City. However, it is clear (and should be clear to Beth and the other members of the City Commission) that we already have what we need to protect the City’s financial position.
Let’s summarize where the City stands today (which is fundamentally the same place the City stood when the commuter rail agreement was signed with Orange County in 2007).
· The City committed $375,000 and has assurances for funding of at least $3,000,000 to pay the capital costs of planning and constructing a Winter Park commuter rail station.
· The City has the right to terminate the agreement if full capital funding for the Winter Park station does not materialize. (It is clear to me the agreement would be and should be terminated under such a circumstance.)
· The City has rights to follow and understand the operating details of the commuter rail system for seven years during which time it has no responsibility for any Local Operating Support Costs or Debt Service Costs.
· If a dedicated funding source is secured after seven years of commuter rail operation the City of Winter Park will not have to pay Local Operating Support Costs or Debt Service Costs related to the Winter Park commuter rail station.
· If a dedicated funding source is not secured we will have had seven years of free experience with the commuter rail system, its rider ship, costs, and impact on our community available to access whether or not to exercise the opt-out clause.
· If a dedicated funding source is not secured after seven years of operation the opt-out clause gives the City negotiating leverage to change the agreement with Orange County in ways that reflect the then current realities and needs, and to do so based on measurable experience to assure the City is receiving fair value.
The existing agreement affords the City full capital funding for a commuter rail station, a free ride on operating the station and debt service for seven years, leverage through the opt-out clause to renegotiate based on detailed experience should a dedicated funding source not be secured, and the right to shut down the station after seven years with little or no future City obligations (but certainly costs on Winter Park taxpayers through more County level taxation) should a dedicated funding source not be secured. We receive this flexibility and financial protection in exchange for a total expected commitment of $375,000 in matching funds.
Subject to clarifications requested above, I conclude the existing agreement affords the City flexibility as well as financial protection and security. Further, I know of no events since the City entered into the commuter rail agreement that materially change the costs and risks, benefits and opportunities from those argued at the time the people of Winter Park voted on this matter. As Beth Dillaha stated during her election campaign, “In March [2007], the citizens approved a commuter-rail stop in Winter Park, and I fully support the citizens.” I do too.
I ask the City Commission to affirm support for the existing commuter rail agreement and move forward.
Citizen Survey – Honest and Unbiased? »
Response to Commissioner DeCiccio
Response to Commissioner Sullivan
Traffic Truth
Clueless or Careless?
Tax Rate Increase Stopped – Taxes Increase
Less Tax Increase, More Chickens
Commissioners Likely To Reverse Tax Rate Increase
DeCiccio Reverses Course?
Do You Want Chickens in Your Neighbor’s Yard?
The Tax Leadership Solution
How Much Will The Tax Increase Cost You?
Get Your “Stop Tax Increases” Sign
Mayor Leary Addresses Tax Increase
Categories Select Category Arts and Culture (2) Commuter Rail (14) Development (45) Districts (13) Election 2009 (8) Election 2010 (12) Election 2011 (12) Election 2012 (4) Election 2014 (3) Election 2015 (14) Election 2018 (2) Election 2020 (6) Elections (41) Ethics (32) Money (22) Parks (17) Policy (131)
About and Subscribe
About Winter Park Perspective
Subscribe to Winter Park Perspective
City of Winter Park
LocalNewsOrlando
the32789
WP Voter
Peter Weldon on Clueless or Careless?
Minoga Barreto Family on Clueless or Careless?
Pitt Warner on Three Questions
James Bolen on Clueless or Careless?
Pitt Warner on Clueless or Careless?