Monday, April 01, 2024
Sunday, March 31, 2024
Trademark and Logo Usage THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST NAME
Trademark and Logo Usage
THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST NAME
Church trademarks, such as “Seventh-day Adventist,” “Adventist,” and “Ministry,” may be used only in connection with denominational ministries and non-commercial activities of approved lay and professional groups. Use of these trademarks shall be controlled by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists through its Trademark Committee. Church trademarks shall not be used in any manner that will jeopardize the Church’s tax-exempt status.
THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST LOGO
The registered trademark may be used by the Seventh-day Adventist Church, its entities, institutions, and churches, as authorized by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, its divisions, unions, and conferences.
Trademarks shall not be utilized in commercial endeavors.
REGISTERED TRADEMARKS
ADVENTIST®
ADVENTIST BOOK CENTER®
ADVENTIST COMMUNITY SERVICES®
ADVENTIST COMMUNITY SERVICES Design®
ADVENTIST HEALTH® (fancy)
ADVENTIST HEALTH SYSTEM®
ADVENTIST HEALTHCARE®
ADVENTIST INFORMATION MINISTRY®
ADVENTIST LAWYER®
ADVENTIST-LAYMEN’S SERVICES AND INDUSTRIES® (ASI)
ADVENTIST NEWSLINE®
ADVENTIST NEWS NETWORK®
ADVENTIST PIONEER LIBRARY®
ADVENTIST REVIEW®
ADVENTIST RISK MANAGEMENT®
Saturday, March 30, 2024
Nicole Shanahan (RFK Jr's VP pick)
Nicole Shanahan
Next election
November 5, 2024
Contact
Campaign website
Personal Twitter
Personal LinkedIn
Nicole Shanahan is running for vice president on a ticket with presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (I) in the 2024 presidential election. Kennedy selected Shanahan as his running mate on March 26, 2024. To read more about Kennedy's campaign, click here.
Shanahan is a patent attorney and entrepreneur. She serves as the president of the Bia-Echo Foundation, which invests in helping older women have children, criminal justice, and environmental issues.[1][2]
See Kennedy's presidential campaign overview and Presidential candidates, 2024, for more information about the 2024 presidential election.
Biography
Shanahan grew up in Oakland, California. She was raised in a single-parent household by her mother, who immigrated to the United States from China.[3] Shanahan received bachelor's degrees in Asian Studies, economics, and Mandarin Chinese from the University of Puget Sound in 2007.[3][2]
She began her career working as an intellectual property paralegal and patent specialist before receiving a law degree from the Santa Clara University School of Law in 2014. After graduating, Shanahan founded ClearAccessIP, a tech company that works in patent analytics and intellectual property asset management. She sold the company in 2020.[4]
As of 2024, she serves as the president of the Bia-Echo Foundation, which invests in helping older women have children, criminal justice, and environmental issues.[1][2]
Elections
2024
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (I) selected Shanahan as his running mate on March 26, 2024. Kennedy began his campaign for the 2024 presidential election on April 5, 2023. Click the links below to read more about the 2024 presidential election:
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. presidential campaign, 2024
Presidential candidates, 2024
Democratic presidential nomination, 2024
Republican presidential nomination, 2024
See also
Presidential candidates, 2024
Democratic presidential nomination, 2024
Republican presidential nomination, 2024
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Jump up to:1.0 1.1 Reuters, "RFK Jr to pick lawyer Nicole Shanahan as VP in 2024 bid, WSJ reports," March 26, 2024
- ↑ Jump up to:2.0 2.1 2.2 LinkedIn, "Nicole Shanahan," accessed March 26, 2024
- ↑ Jump up to:3.0 3.1 Politico, "55 Things You Need to Know About Nicole Shanahan," March 26, 2024
- ↑ IP CloseUp, "ACQUISITION OF CLEARACCESS IP BY SPANGENBERG’S IPWE COULD BE A HARBINGER OF CHANGE IN THE PATENT SPACE," April 30, 2020
Source
Friday, March 29, 2024
Thursday, March 28, 2024
Tuesday, March 26, 2024
Sunday, March 24, 2024
Saturday, March 23, 2024
Friday, March 22, 2024
Thursday, March 21, 2024
Vatican Power Over Governments
By Stephen D. Mumford, DrPH | 18 March 2024
(Credit: YouTube / screengrab)
Excerpt from Chapter 5 of our Chairman Dr. Stephen D. Mumford’s book, American Democracy and the Vatican: Population Growth and National Security (1984). The book is available at Kindle here and to read for free here.
Vatican Power Over Governments
It is also true that the Vatican controls governments whenever possible—either completely or partially. Until this strong hold on Catholic countries or those with substantial Catholic leadership is greatly reduced, we can expect very little improvement in world efforts to control population growth. The Vatican’s strong influence on international donor agencies must be eliminated as well.
Jean-Guy Vaillancourt, professor of sociology at the University of Montreal, a Catholic, and author of Papal Power: A Study of Vatican Control Over Lay Catholic Elites,[9] has studied extensively Vatican efforts to achieve this dominance:
[The] Vatican is, above all, an organizational weapon in the hands of the papacy and other top ecclesiastical officials. Religious ideology has increasingly become subordinated to organizational imperatives. Among these internal and external organizational imperatives, organizational control of lay elites seems to have become a major preoccupation and necessity for Church authorities.[10]
No matter who the pope is, there are structural and institutional influences that operate because the Vatican is not only a religious institution and a center of political power but also an economic institution with vast financial and real estate holdings, a “fiscal paradise” which ranks alongside Monaco and Hong Kong as a haven for tax evasion.[11]
In spite of the purely religious image that it endeavors to put forward, the Vatican is deeply involved in Italian and international politics and finance, promoting conservatism and capitalism while professing a Christian approach to democratic reforms. The Vatican is constantly intervening in Italian politics to protect its interests, including its economic interests. The Vatican is not only a political and a religious entity, it is also an important financial enterprise…. Church authorities have let themselves be used by political and economic elites as ideological legitimators of capitalism and conservatism, in return for economic advantage and political favors.[12]
Papal Power: A Study of Vatican Control over Lay Catholic Elites by Jean-Guy Vaillancourt. https://t.co/zCZ9VJWyxw
— Church and State (@ChurchAndStateN) March 18, 2024
Excerpt from Chapter 5 of our Chairman Dr. Stephen D. Mumford’s book, American Democracy and the Vatican: Population Growth and National Security (1984). The book is available at Kindle here and to read for free here.
Vatican Power Over Governments
It is also true that the Vatican controls governments whenever possible—either completely or partially. Until this strong hold on Catholic countries or those with substantial Catholic leadership is greatly reduced, we can expect very little improvement in world efforts to control population growth. The Vatican’s strong influence on international donor agencies must be eliminated as well.
Jean-Guy Vaillancourt, professor of sociology at the University of Montreal, a Catholic, and author of Papal Power: A Study of Vatican Control Over Lay Catholic Elites,[9] has studied extensively Vatican efforts to achieve this dominance:
[The] Vatican is, above all, an organizational weapon in the hands of the papacy and other top ecclesiastical officials. Religious ideology has increasingly become subordinated to organizational imperatives. Among these internal and external organizational imperatives, organizational control of lay elites seems to have become a major preoccupation and necessity for Church authorities.[10]
No matter who the pope is, there are structural and institutional influences that operate because the Vatican is not only a religious institution and a center of political power but also an economic institution with vast financial and real estate holdings, a “fiscal paradise” which ranks alongside Monaco and Hong Kong as a haven for tax evasion.[11]
In spite of the purely religious image that it endeavors to put forward, the Vatican is deeply involved in Italian and international politics and finance, promoting conservatism and capitalism while professing a Christian approach to democratic reforms. The Vatican is constantly intervening in Italian politics to protect its interests, including its economic interests. The Vatican is not only a political and a religious entity, it is also an important financial enterprise…. Church authorities have let themselves be used by political and economic elites as ideological legitimators of capitalism and conservatism, in return for economic advantage and political favors.[12]
Papal Power: A Study of Vatican Control over Lay Catholic Elites by Jean-Guy Vaillancourt. https://t.co/zCZ9VJWyxw
— Church and State (@ChurchAndStateN) March 18, 2024
Monday, March 18, 2024
Controversial 'Civil War' Movie Prompts Debate Over US Schism
Story by AFP
Political elites and Congress are more divided than ever, but polarization among the public is "overstated," said Howell.
Survey responses to vaguely worded questions do not necessarily speak to on-the-ground realities about how people will actually behave, he added.
"I don't think we're on the brink of a civil war," said Howell.
"It's more diffuse than that... a hollowing out of the state, a sabotage of administrative agencies, the disaffection of the larger public."
"All that can be true, and it also not be the case that we're about to line up as we did in 1861, and en masse begin slaughtering one another."
On the other hand, author Stephen Marche believes "the United States is a textbook case of a country headed for civil war" -- just not in the way depicted by the movie.
Marche's book, "The Next Civil War: Dispatches from the American Future," uses political science models to suggest five scenarios that could plausibly trigger widespread internecine conflict.
These include anti-government militias clashing with federal forces, or a president being assassinated.
Political violence "becomes acceptable, and in a certain sense, inevitable, because people don't feel that their government is legitimate, and that therefore violence is the only response," said Marche.
"I would say that to a certain extent, that has already happened in America."
Cautioning that he has not yet seen the movie, Marche says a conflict fought along geographical lines like the North-South civil war of the 1860s is unlikely.
More likely than state-on-state violence would be a "massive, splintering chaos," reminiscent of the late 20th-century "Troubles" in Northern Ireland.
In Marche's book, retired US Army colonel Peter Mansoor says a new conflict "would not be like the first civil war, with armies maneuvering on the battlefield."
"I think it would very much be a free-for-all, neighbor-on-neighbor, based on beliefs and skin colors and religion. And it would be horrific."
'Civil War' director Alex Garland deliberately leaves the specific origins and politics of the conflict vague in his film
© LISA O'CONNOR
A major film that imagines a second civil war in the near-future United States has highlighted fears about the divided state of the nation ahead of November's presidential election.
"Civil War," which premiered at the SXSW Festival this week and hits theaters April 12, pictures a three-term US president in Washington DC battling secessionist forces from California and Texas.
The movie stars Kirsten Dunst as a journalist travelling through a broken, dystopian nation. The FBI has been disbanded, and military drone strikes launched on US citizens.
In early reviews, The Atlantic noted an "uncomfortable resonance in these politically polarized times." Rolling Stone said "you might accidentally mistake" the film's futuristic premise for the present.
So, just how plausible is the film's scenario?
The presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump, was recently criticized for seemingly joking he would be a "dictator" on "day one" if he wins a second term as president. He faces charges of conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 election, which he lost to Democrat Joe Biden.
Biden has accused his predecessor of embracing "political violence."
A survey by the Brookings Institution and the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) last year showed 23 percent of Americans agree "true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country."
A major film that imagines a second civil war in the near-future United States has highlighted fears about the divided state of the nation ahead of November's presidential election.
"Civil War," which premiered at the SXSW Festival this week and hits theaters April 12, pictures a three-term US president in Washington DC battling secessionist forces from California and Texas.
The movie stars Kirsten Dunst as a journalist travelling through a broken, dystopian nation. The FBI has been disbanded, and military drone strikes launched on US citizens.
In early reviews, The Atlantic noted an "uncomfortable resonance in these politically polarized times." Rolling Stone said "you might accidentally mistake" the film's futuristic premise for the present.
So, just how plausible is the film's scenario?
The presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump, was recently criticized for seemingly joking he would be a "dictator" on "day one" if he wins a second term as president. He faces charges of conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 election, which he lost to Democrat Joe Biden.
Biden has accused his predecessor of embracing "political violence."
A survey by the Brookings Institution and the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) last year showed 23 percent of Americans agree "true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country."
Related video: Civil War Movie Trailer (Dailymotion)
But William Howell, a University of Chicago political science professor, said while there is cause for concern about rising political violence, "talk about 21st-century muskets being fired at one another isn't very helpful."
Political elites and Congress are more divided than ever, but polarization among the public is "overstated," said Howell.
Survey responses to vaguely worded questions do not necessarily speak to on-the-ground realities about how people will actually behave, he added.
"I don't think we're on the brink of a civil war," said Howell.
"It's more diffuse than that... a hollowing out of the state, a sabotage of administrative agencies, the disaffection of the larger public."
"All that can be true, and it also not be the case that we're about to line up as we did in 1861, and en masse begin slaughtering one another."
On the other hand, author Stephen Marche believes "the United States is a textbook case of a country headed for civil war" -- just not in the way depicted by the movie.
Marche's book, "The Next Civil War: Dispatches from the American Future," uses political science models to suggest five scenarios that could plausibly trigger widespread internecine conflict.
These include anti-government militias clashing with federal forces, or a president being assassinated.
Political violence "becomes acceptable, and in a certain sense, inevitable, because people don't feel that their government is legitimate, and that therefore violence is the only response," said Marche.
"I would say that to a certain extent, that has already happened in America."
Cautioning that he has not yet seen the movie, Marche says a conflict fought along geographical lines like the North-South civil war of the 1860s is unlikely.
More likely than state-on-state violence would be a "massive, splintering chaos," reminiscent of the late 20th-century "Troubles" in Northern Ireland.
In Marche's book, retired US Army colonel Peter Mansoor says a new conflict "would not be like the first civil war, with armies maneuvering on the battlefield."
"I think it would very much be a free-for-all, neighbor-on-neighbor, based on beliefs and skin colors and religion. And it would be horrific."
- 'Fault lines' -
In the film, director Alex Garland deliberately leaves the specific origins and politics of the conflict vague. He has said the movie is intended to be "a conversation" about polarization and populism.
It offers little exposition, and focuses on the horrific daily reality for American citizens and journalists.
"We don't need it explained -- we know exactly why it might happen, we know exactly what the fault lines and the pressures are," Garland told the audience at Thursday's premiere in Texas.
The movie's "three-term president" appears to invoke the fears held by many Americans that Trump -- if re-elected -- could ignore the US Constitution's two-term maximum, and refuse to step down after four years.
"It's hard to think otherwise, if you just take him at his word -- and I think we would be mistaken not to," said Howell.
If that scenario was reached, said Marche, talk of a civil war may already be redundant.
"If there's a three-term president, America has already ended," he said. "There's no United States anymore."
In the film, director Alex Garland deliberately leaves the specific origins and politics of the conflict vague. He has said the movie is intended to be "a conversation" about polarization and populism.
It offers little exposition, and focuses on the horrific daily reality for American citizens and journalists.
"We don't need it explained -- we know exactly why it might happen, we know exactly what the fault lines and the pressures are," Garland told the audience at Thursday's premiere in Texas.
The movie's "three-term president" appears to invoke the fears held by many Americans that Trump -- if re-elected -- could ignore the US Constitution's two-term maximum, and refuse to step down after four years.
"It's hard to think otherwise, if you just take him at his word -- and I think we would be mistaken not to," said Howell.
If that scenario was reached, said Marche, talk of a civil war may already be redundant.
"If there's a three-term president, America has already ended," he said. "There's no United States anymore."
amz/hg/st
Sunday, March 17, 2024
March 3: European Day for a Work-free Sunday
On this year's annual European Day for a Work-free Sunday the European Sunday Alliances launches its manifesto for the upcoming EU elections
On the occasion of this year’s annual European Day for a Work-free Sunday on March 3, the European Sunday Alliance reminds that synchronised resting time is an effective tool to counter loneliness and highlights its importance for the mental health of workers.
In the view of upcoming EU elections in June 2024, the European Sunday Alliance calls on Members of the European Parliament and candidates to the upcoming European Elections to support the Elections Manifesto of its Steering Committee to recognise the value of the establishment of a weekly common day of rest, by tradition on Sunday, at the EU level for all citizens.
On the occasion of the European Day for a Work-free Sunday, the European Sunday Alliance is glad about support for a work-free Sunday as expressed by a series of Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) from different political groups, among them Brando Benifei (S&D, Italy), Gabriele Bischoff (S&D, Germany), Katrin Langensiepen (Greens/EFA, Germany), Dragos Pislaru (Renew, Romania), Dennis Radtke (EPP, Germany), Evelyn Regner (S&D, Austria), Michaela Sojdrova (EPP, Czech Republic) and Tomas Zdechovsky (EPP, Czech Republic) – and, as sponsor of the European Sunday Alliance, Miriam Lexmann (EPP, Slovakia):
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)