Picutres Of Blonde Highlighted Hair

A scary. THE BUTCHER

A long time ago told me this story, tale or legend, put the adjective you like. The truth is that one day, perhaps in history, maybe because of where we were, both the narrator, like myself, "the end of it, made me jumped in my seat. The case is that a few days ago, a radio show on Saturday nights, bring me the story again to the head, and again, though this time to meet quietly in my house, I returned to take another gasp in my seat.
was, during the course of a flight transocenáico, between Barajas Airport in Madrid, and New York JFK. One of the films, from which we could enjoy the transport we used, proved to be about mediums and apparitions. From this, one of my fellow passengers, a rate of about 50, dressed up, "I began to tell a story, a member of commercial aviation had told him years earlier. Today, if I may, I want to share with you.
was a flight like this, "began my seatmate," night. When all the people were resting, or sleeping soundly, awaiting the arrival at their destination. In one of the best seats, was riding a tall, strong, handsome, "pilot aircraft, but on that flight, was not sitting at the controls of the apparatus, but I was using the flight for the use and enjoyment. Because of its height, the young pilot felt uncomfortable and unable to rest, it was then, when one of the hostesses of the crew, knowing their situation, and knowing he companion, offered the crew bed rest (resting place crew). A place, away from public areas of the unit, which served to the crew or mechanical, rest during the long hours of sailing. Slowly and carefully, because of the narrowness of the facilities, "the youngster reached the rest area, decided not to turn on the light, he knew perfectly all the ins and outs of the appliance and the dim light of security, she used to be geared to the small litters were at the bottom.
When the driver approached the top bunk, leaving the bottom open, in case a crew member also decided to lower to rest. Soon, he realized there was someone else in the cabin, fixed it again, and saw that on the top bunk was a little girl, about four or five years that he felt the contact was roused a little, but quickly turned her angelic face and went deep in reverie. The pilot smiled and immediately the girl fully clothed. He, without removing or even shoes or tie, lay down to take a nap.
When he awoke a while later, after beheading a little dream, stood up and was surprised that the girl was no longer there, also the top sheet of the small cot, stood straight, as if anything or anyone, had been resting on her last hours. Well, he thought, sure is a daughter or relative of any of the staff on board. He returned to his seat, and when a stewardess came to inquire after his break, the girl asked her for four or five years, which had found below. The stewardess surprised, looked at him strangely. No child between the passage today, he said. The young pilot, scratch your head, it is impossible to answer, and grasping the hand of the attendant, took her to the crew rest area, and showed the place where a couple of hours before had seen the child. It can not be ruled again the stewardess. Have you played? "He asked, of course," replied he, "I even wrapped. The stewardess broke down, his face turned white and had to leave the small place.
When both arrived at the cabin, the flight attendant had to go to the bathroom to vomit. Then, another colleague approached to see what was happening, it was then, when the driver began to explain what happened quietly. He had wrapped in the crew area to a girl of about four or five years, but he did not understand what was happening. It was then when a new stewardess changed color, and the tension came over her features.
The last stewardess arrived, seeing that his companion did not recover, approached the young pilot and away from the bathing area, we point to the start of the aircraft. Do you see that couple over there? "He asked. It was a marriage of fifty years, the two slept, leaning on each other, but their faces did not stay relaxed, as would be normal. His grin, marked concern and sadness.
Do you see that couple? "Repeated the attendant," and continued while swallowing saliva. Carry the coffin of her daughter, a girl of five years, is among the baggage, she is the only girl traveling on this flight. The young, pale faded on a chair nearby.

What Would It Take To Get Through Meps

Europe and the crucifix. An alliance against secularism

Duccio di Boninsegna, "Crucifixion"

(1308-1311, Siena, Museo dell'Opera Metropolitana,
detail of "Majesty")

Europe and the crucifix. An alliance against secularism

Lautsi

The case has raised a stir in Europe after the European Court of Human Rights condemned Italy for the presence of crucifixes in public schools.

This case is very important and symbolic, because the stakes the very legitimacy of the visible presence of Christ in Italian schools and, by extension, Europe. It is a symbol of the current conflict on the future of cultural and religious identity of Europe.

We are honored to play to this day, May 3, 2011, Feast of the Invention of Santa Cruz (Missale Romanum Editio Typica 1962), the very interesting article Puppinck Gregor, director of European Centre for Law and Justice (Strasbourg), entitled "Europe and the crucifix. An alliance against secularism, "published in L'Osservatore Romano , No. 31 - English language edition, Sunday, August 1, 2010 - pages 4-6.

Europe and the crucifix
An alliance against secularism

Grégor Puppinck *

The case has raised Lautsi stir in Europe after the European Court of Human Rights condemned Italy for the presence of crucifixes in public schools, a presence that allegedly violates human rights. To give a legal basis for its decision, the Court created a new requirement, that the state is "obliged to religious neutrality in the field of public education."

The Court added that he saw "how the exposure in public school classes, a symbol that it is reasonable to associate with Catholicism (religion in Italy) can serve the educational pluralism, which is essential to preserve a "democratic society" as conceived by the Convention. " Thus, the Court, the European states should be areligious (religious neutrality) to serve the pluralism that would cause constitutive of a society democratic. In other words, the Court states that a society to be democratic, must give up their religious identity. Italy filed an appeal against this decision before the Chambre Grande of the Strasbourg Court. The appeal was set out last June 30 and the opinion of the Court is expected to fall.

This case is very important. It is symbolic, since at stake is the very legitimacy of the visible presence of Christ in Italian schools and, by extension, Europe. It has become a symbol in the current conflict on the future of cultural and religious identity of Europe. A conflict between supporters of the complete secularization of society and defenders of an open Europe and faithful to its deepest identity. The former see secularism as the solution for managing religious pluralism and pluralism as an argument that can be imposed secularism. Secularism is not a completely spontaneous or inevitable phenomenon. Including through appropriate policy options, such as anti-clerical policy of France in the early twentieth century.

identity Need

Europe is different. Religious pluralism, cosmopolitanism that serves as a paradigm for the reflection of the Court is really a weird fiction in most of Europe. However, it is true that we are in an era in which national identities are put into question, but at the same time is very strong need for identity. Western Europe at the end of World War II lived legally in a regime proclaimed religious freedom, but in fact what we have known it is rather a simple system of religious tolerance . This is explained by the fact that religious minorities in those days were very visible and not about changing the religious identity of the nations to which they emigrated.

Today the situation is different. The presence of Islam forcing Europe to actually take a position on religious freedom. This election is not just a philosophical stance, but also has important practical consequences on the reality of Western religious identity. It is increasingly clear that public institutions of western Europe and Lautsi sentence demonstrates, have chosen to limit religious freedom and impose a secularization of society to promote a cultural model should be in which the absence of values \u200b\u200b(neutrality) and relativism (pluralism) are values \u200b\u200bin themselves to support a political project than it is to religion and identity. This political project, as a philosophical system, seeks to dominate.

In this context of radicalization of secularization Lautsi case inserts. This is the last and biggest obstacle against which it has met the process of secularization after the debate on the "Christian roots" in the preamble of the Constitutional Treaty. The fact that a jurisdiction may have, on behalf of religious freedom, concluding that a society to be democratic, must give up their religious identity, requires a reflection on the evolution of the concept. Lautsi case shows that this concept designed to protect society from state atheism, the end has become an instrument of social legitimization and privatization of religion. In short, this case shows that this way of understanding religious freedom can turn against religion and is the main conceptual tool of the secularization of society.

If they refuse collective identities

The first and foremost lack Lautsi reveals that the case is the inability of the modern conception of religious freedom to think and to respect the religious dimension social life and the social dimension of religion . The theory has been Lautsi Case recognition is based on the exclusive rights of the individual who is endowed with a conscience is considered infallible by nature and bound to change in a society imagined as axiological (morally) neutral. This freedom is seen as founded on universal human nature is imperative because it is the expression of one aspect of human dignity. By contrast, the public company, considered as an artificial entity of the individual service must be set aside against the only legitimate authority: the freedom that comes from individual dignity.

religious identity in society and not, in itself, value and legitimacy. We consider a simply inherited from history. In many areas, international law recognized that nations can be in possession of individual rights as the right to protect its cultural, linguistic and ecological and transmit to future generations, but this does not apply to their religious identity, even if one of the most profound identity. In religious matters, nations do not own any rights. According to the modern conception of freedom of religion, only individuals, taken separately, have religious rights that are exercised in the limits set by national legislation. Religion and the various intermediate companies do not enjoy special protection: only every believer, individually, is entitled to that right, and this right is exercised first and foremost on third parties and for society.

This religious freedom would thus neutralizing the religious identity of the society, but this neutrality is deeply delusional. In fact, although the civil power can be indifferent to the intimate convictions of the people, can not be entirely about religion as this is by nature a social phenomenon. So, pretend to be indifferent to religion at the end means deny the fundamental social dimension of religion and restrict it to the private sphere of personal convictions.

is an expression of a philosophical option in the case Lautsi say that the state should act as if the Italian society and culture have nothing religious. However, a State, a people necessarily have an identity and that identity is necessarily a religious dimension. A state is not a concept, not a neutral structure, not the coldness of a supranational institution, a state is the emanation of a people, its history and identity. In this light, the symbols used to represent precisely, for embody the components of social identity. Collective identity is built around symbols. The religious dimension of social identity of a people to form and express a range of social practices and customs, festivals, names, a certain kind of human relationships, clothing and even food. Is also manifested by visible symbols such as crucifixes in schools, in hospitals or in public squares and public monuments.

To be consistent with itself, the European Court should give to close at Christmas or Easter, and adopt, as did the French revolutionaries, a new calendar without reference the life of Christ. In fact, the religious identity of a society can not be neutralized, can be denied, attacked and replaced, but not neutralized. Therefore, the true heart of the matter in the case Lautsi is the legitimacy of a supranational authority to rule to amend the religious dimension of the identity of a country. The legal theory of religious freedom can not take account of the Christian identity of Europe is precisely what the case revealed Lautsi. Therefore, the unprecedented political backlash has prompted the November 2009 decision of major importance, inasmuch as it is a real affirmation of the legitimacy own particular identity of Christianity in Europe, compared to the dynamics of secularization.

Individual and

Lautsi

The case also shows that the way the Strasbourg Court facing religious freedom is based on a conflictual conception of the relationship between the individual and society. Society and the individual are not considered in a complementary relationship, but the opposition: the company is the main obstacle to individual freedom are the societies that limit freedom, therefore, should be revoked, become as neutral possible in order to free space to the free exercise of individual conscience.

conflictual

This concept leads to a logical exclusive claim "my individual right" against the whole society. The right of children of Mrs. Lautsi not be forced to see the symbol of Christ ought to prevail, with no compromise possible on the desire of the majority of an entire people, and even all members of the peoples of Europe. The absolutism of the dignity and individual autonomy leads to the absolutism of the right which does so, and the cancellation of the interests of the community.

freedom against religion

Lautsi

The case must also raises questions about the dangers of the logic of religious freedom when carried to extremes, in that it leads to a denial of religion in the name of freedom of religion, to defend freedom of religion socially suppressing religion. This is what the Court has done: he has tried to defend religious freedom by abolishing the religious symbol. This is a real historical and conceptual shift, since after the war they wanted freedom of religion as an instrument of defense of the transcendence of man to the nihilism of State. Freedom of religion is probably the most right violated in Europe in the twentieth century, their enemies refuse to accept that religion and freedom are not necessarily used antinomian "freedom from religion, and even consider the simple manifestation of the religion of others violates religious freedom.

Finally, as shown by the European Court's case law, religious freedom is no longer a primary law, fundamental, directly derived from the transcendent nature of the human person, but a secondary right, granted by civil authority and derived from the ideal of democratic pluralism. This is a conceptual shift. So are becoming more frequent in the case formulas such as: freedom of religion guarantees pluralism and therefore deserves special protection. The manifestation of religious beliefs is thus framed by the demands of public order assimilated to neutrality.

Not only, but in reality the freedom of religion is increasingly limited only to the freedom of faith, ie the inner freedom to believe or not believe. It would be a mistake to think that faith is independent of religion as one's inner and outer. Limit freedom of religion (because of non-social legitimacy of religion) to protect freedom of faith alone (as a pure expression of human transcendence) corresponds to a family, to prohibit the prayers and catechism in the name of freedom of the act of faith of the children. In fact, this would have very little chance of transmitting the faith to children. The same goes for society. Remove religion from society the equivalent of removing faith from the hearts of future generations.

unprecedented reaction

Lautsi

The ruling has caused a social and political reaction unprecedented in the history of the Council of Europe. Never a decision of the Strasbourg Court was so contested, so vigorously, not only for believers, but also by civil society and governments. Three weeks after the hearing before the Grande Chambre , it is increasingly obvious that it has won a great victory against the dynamics of secularization. Although Italy has not yet legally cattle, has already become politically masterful victory. Indeed, until now, no less than twenty European countries have expressed their official support to Italy to defend publicly the legitimacy of the presence of Christian symbols in society and in particular in schools.

At first, ten countries were committed in the case Lautsi to "third party intervention" (Amicus curiae ). Each-Armenia, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, Lithuania, Malta, Monaco, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, has surrendered to the Tribunal a written memorial inviting him to withdraw his first choice. These memorials are not only legal value, but are also and above all important testimonies of defense heritage and identity of these countries to the imposition of a single cultural model. Lithuania, for example, has not hesitated to draw a parallel between the ruling Lautsi and religious persecution he suffered and which was manifested mainly in the banning of religious symbols.

"Archbishop Gero Crucifix" (969-971, Cologne Cathedral)

These ten countries so far have added another ten. Indeed, the governments of Albania, Austria, Croatia, Hungary, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Moldova, Poland, Serbia, Slovakia and Ukraine have publicly questioned the Court's opinion and order to respect the identities and national religious traditions. Many governments have insisted on saying that religious identity is the source of values \u200b\u200band of European unity.

So together with Italy, almost half of the Member States of the Council of Europe (21 of 47) and has publicly opposed this attempt and forced secularization has affirmed the social legitimacy of Christianity in European society. Beyond the actual arguments of the defense of identities, cultures and national Christian traditions, in fact these twenty states have affirmed and publicly defended their commitment to Christ himself recalled that conforms to the common good that Christ is present and honored in society.

This coalition, which groups most of Central and Eastern Europe, reveals the persistence of internal cultural divide in Europe also reveals that this division can be overcome, as evidenced by the importance of support to Italy by the countries of Orthodox tradition.

Orthodox and secular

The importance of the support given by countries Orthodox tradition is in large part on the determination of the Patriarchate of Moscow to defend against the advance of secularism. Putting the request through the work of Patriarch Kiril of "uniting the Christian Churches against the advance of secularism", Metropolitan Hilarion has proposed the creation of a strategic alliance between Catholics and Orthodox to defend together Christian tradition against secularism, liberalism and relativism prevailing in modern Europe: "Secularism thrives today in Europe," wrote the chairman of the department of external relations of patriarchy, is in itself a pseudo-religion its dogmas, its rules, its religion and its symbols. Following the example of twentieth century Russian communism, seeks to monopoly and can not stand any competition. For this reason, secular leaders react a bit too much to all religious and mentioning the name of God. [...] The current secularism, atheism as Russia, is considered a substitute for Christianity. Therefore, it can not remain neutral and indifferent to the latter. Is openly hostile to him. " This analysis is in line with that made by Pope, who on January 24, 2008 said the bishops of the Episcopal Conference of Slovenia that "Western-style secularism, different and perhaps more covert than the Marxist signs which can not but be concerned. "

This important phenomenon indicates that the democratic transition in Eastern European countries was not accompanied by cultural transition as the West was anxious. Today, we see rather a reverse movement of reaffirmation of identity that goes through a form of restoration the orthodox model of relationship between the Church and civil power. In fact, the wall of separation between the civil and religious disappears in favor of a partnership to serve the common good. The civil and the religious consider themselves legitimate and good this collaboration, have a hard time understanding their regular condemned by the Strasbourg Court, which oversees the strict separation between the religious and civil.

Strong support came also from this could herald a major shift in the dynamics of building European unity. Indeed, he has always thought that European unity was to take place inevitably from west to east through a conquest of the latter to economic liberalism and western culture. However, rare event, the case has provoked Lautsi reverse, from east to west. Eastern Europe, based in Catholicism, is opposed to the West in defense of Christian culture and a true concept of religious freedom. Clearly the proponents of freedom from materialism are no longer where they were a while.

During the proceedings before the Strasbourg Court has been able to appreciate some discomfort for the Eastern nations that dared to answer that the Tribunal's work was correct. This malaise has noticed, for example, when member countries have involved have tried to speak during the hearing. Normally, this request does not create difficulties, and are granted thirty minutes to each State in order to expose their arguments. Lautsi If, however, these states have met with outright refusal. Only after insisting a lot have been obtained, all together, fifteen minutes. Some of these countries have experienced this as an affront and a reflection of self-defense of the Court. This common action before the Court is in any case, a historical event. Among the issues to arise in the immediate future is that of whether the Court will be able to reopen the debate on its ideological paradigm in religious matters. Twenty-one countries of the Council of Europe, forty-seven, have expressly asked to do so; peremptorily reject this invitation directly undermine the legitimacy of the Tribunal.

The Council of Europe, on which the Strasbourg Court, in its founding Charter states "the unbreakable bond" of the peoples of Europe with the "spiritual and moral values \u200b\u200bare their common heritage." These spiritual and moral values \u200b\u200bare not private in nature, are constitutive of the religious identity of Europe and recognized as bases of European political project. As the pope recalled recently, Christianity is the source of these spiritual and moral values. The alliance of these twenty countries indicates that it is possible to build the future of European society on this basis, the price of a lucid reflection on the contemporary Western cultural model and Christian faithfulness. Europe can not face the future by giving up Christ.

* Director of the European Centre for Law and Justice (Strasbourg)

Summary:

Europe and the crucifix. An alliance against secularism

Need

identity

If they refuse collective identities

Individual and freedom against religion

unprecedented reaction

Orthodox and secular

Source:

L'Osservatore Romano , No. 31 - English language edition, Sunday, August 1, 2010 - pages 4-6.

☩ ☩ ☩

Click here to read the rest

What Do Bars On Letterman Jackets Mean

Dos de Mayo is spring

Dos de Mayo is spring

Dos de Mayo is spring
all go to war;
Some laugh and others cry:
and others die of sorrow!

But the most worthwhile leads
the one carrying the flag.
He asks the captain,
"Why are you so upset?
Is it a father or mother is
or is it because of the war? ". Neither is

father or mother is, or is
because of the war.

is for a girl that will die of sorrow!

Take my horse and go
and rides to her that a soldier
less
not going to lose the war!

To order my Captain!
The first is my Flag, then there is my company

and last, but it hurts:
the woman I love most!

☩ ☩ ☩

Click here to read the rest