Responding to questions from journalists, the Director of the Holy See Press Office, Matteo Bruni, said four positive cases of the coronavirus were discovered over the weekend among the members of the Swiss Guard.
At present, Bruni explained, they “have symptoms, and are all in isolation.”
Currently, he continued, “the necessary checks are being carried out among those who may have been in direct contact with them.”
“In the meantime, according to instructions issued last week by the Governorate of the Vatican City State, all the guards, whether on duty or not, wear masks, both outdoors and indoors, and observe the prescribed health measures.”
The Press Office Director added that the cases of the four guards are in addition to “three other positive cases found in recent weeks among residents and citizens of the State, all with mild symptoms and for which all the necessary measures of isolation at home and verification of the persons involved have been observed.”
ATLANTA, Oct. 12, 2020 /Standard Newswire/ — The new book ‘American Crisis: Cultural Marxism and The Culture War – A Christian Response’ by Jefrey D. Breshears is an incisive analysis of the origins and effects of the culture war raging in America today.
‘American Crisis’ exposes the insidious cultural Marxism at the root of the chaotic upheaval fomented by socialists, anarchists and “social justice” warriors across our nation during these critical days leading up to the 2020 election.
“This is a perilous time in our nation’s history. The moral and spiritual influences of the past are disintegrating,” says Dr. Breshears, Christian historian, apologist, and president of The Areopagus, a Christian study center in Atlanta, Georgia. “As a result, America has become increasingly chaotic and dysfunctional to an extent unimaginable just a few years ago.”
We are facing an unrelenting culture war that threatens to destabilize the nation, destroy what remains of traditional Judeo-Christian values, and fundamentally transform America into a secular socialist state. Do individual Christians and the Church in general comprehend what is at stake in the 2020 election?
“I am challenging Christians to actively defend the biblical and moral principles upon which our country was built,” says Dr. Breshears. “My hope is that serious and thoughtful Christians will not only read but heed the warnings and challenges presented in ‘American Crisis’ and respond accordingly to the call to wholistic and countercultural Christian discipleship.”
Dozens of books have been published this year by leading Christian and conservative scholars on the threats to American society and culture, but ‘American Crisis’ provides the most in-depth analysis of both the problem and the solution.
A synopsis of the 425-page book including summaries of each chapter is available at The Areopagus website.
Published in July of 2020 by Centre•Pointe Publishing, ‘American Crisis’ is available in paperback and eBook through Amazon.
About Dr. Jefrey D. Breshears / The Areopagus Jefrey D. Breshears, Ph.D., is a Christian historian, apologist, and president of The Areopagus, a Christian study center in Atlanta. Dr. Breshears is the author of ‘C. S. Lewis on Politics, Government, and the Good Society’, ‘Introduction to Bibliology: What Every Christian Should Know’, ‘The Case for Christian Apologetics’ and ‘The Absolute Truth About Relativism’. Visit The Areopagus website to learn more.
p class=”M(0) C($summaryColor) Fz(14px) Lh(1.43em) LineClamp(3,60px)”>When it comes to movies and TV shows based on books, there seem to be two kinds of people: the ones who absolutely must read the book before seeing the screen version and the ones who aren’t bothered either way. Classic books particularly seem to divide people, especially because they are often adapted several times […]
Healthcare dominated the first day of Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing, as Democrats framed her as a lethal threat to the Affordable Care Act and abortion rights and warned that even conducting the hearing during the pandemic was reckless.
Democrats showed uncharacteristic discipline in focusing almost exclusively on the 2010 healthcare law during the first of four days of hearings. A similar, singular healthcare strategy boosted Democratic congressional candidates in the 2018 midterm election. Next month, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on a case challenging the constitutionality of the law, and if Barrett is confirmed, she could be the deciding vote.
“We can’t afford to go back to those days when Americans were denied coverage,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, pointing to past criticisms by Barrett about the law, which is also known as Obamacare.
Republicans, for their part, focused their opening statements on Barrett’s character and strong legal credentials, including graduating first in her class at Notre Dame Law School and clerking for the late Justice Antonin Scalia. They also tried to draw Democrats into a debate about Barrett’s Catholic faith, accusing liberals of imposing a religious litmus test. Democratic senators avoided the topic of religion altogether.
Advertisement
In contrast to the tumultuous hearing of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh in 2018, which started with procedural delay tactics by Democrats within minutes of the opening gavel, Monday’s hearing was cordial and calm. Senators delivered their 10-minute opening statements with no interruptions from members of the opposing party. No members of the public were allowed in the hearing room because of coronavirus concerns, meaning there were not the continuous outbursts and protests that occurred during the Kavanaugh hearing.
In her opening statement, Barrett emphasized a respect for precedent and settled law and a view that the courts are “not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong in our public life.”
A 7th Circuit Court of Appeals judge and former professor at the University of Notre Dame, Barrett told the committee that “policy decisions and value judgments” should be made by elected officials, not the courts.
It remains to be seen whether the civility of the first day of Barrett’s hearing will continue into Tuesday, when two days of questioning will begin. Democrats are expected to press Barrett about her past public comments criticizing the landmark abortion ruling in Roe vs. Wade, but they plan to maintain their overall focus on the Affordable Care Act because it “is on the ballot and on the docket,” said Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.).
Advertisement
“We have to recognize, we represent the Democratic Party on the eve of an election,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), calling for an aggressive response this week from Democrats on the panel that also reflects the “decency that [Democratic presidential candidate] Joe Biden represents.”
Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) predicted that it would be a “long, contentious week” but pledged to try to deliver a fair process. Republicans aim to sprint Trump’s nominee to the court by election day.
Two Senate Republicans have voiced opposition to confirming a nominee so close to the election after Republicans for the same reason blocked President Obama’s pick for the Supreme Court, Merrick Garland, after Scalia died in February 2016. But Republicans appear to have the votes needed to confirm Barrett.
“This is probably not about persuading each other unless something really dramatic happens,” Graham said. “All the Republicans will vote yes, and all the Democrats will vote no,” he predicted.
Advertisement
Graham defended Republicans’ decision to move ahead with filling the vacancy created by the Sept. 18 death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Graham previously promised twice that he would not fill a Supreme Court vacancy if it occurred in an election year, as Scalia’s did. But shortly after Ginsburg’s death, he reversed his position, arguing that Democrats would have done the same.
“Republicans should honor this word,” Feinstein said, “and let the American people be heard. Simply put, I believe we should not be moving forward on this nomination. Not until the election is ended and the next president has taken office.”
Republicans view Barrett’s nomination as a rare opportunity to create a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court majority, as well as to energize voters to turn out at the ballot box for the president and Senate Republicans in increasingly difficult races.
The tension around Barrett’s nomination process has increased in the wake of two Judiciary committee Republicans coming down with COVID-19. Both senators could have contracted the coronavirus at the White House Rose Garden event at which Barrett was publicly announced as the nominee. Democrats demanded that all senators and staff in the hearing room this week take a COVID-19 test before proceeding, but Republicans balked.
Advertisement
The pandemic has dramatically changed the confirmation process. Public access to the hearing room has been eliminated, forcing protesters to rally outside the Senate office buildings, out of earshot of lawmakers. Staff and media access has been sharply curtailed.
Senators had the option of participating virtually, but most attended in person. Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), the party’s vice presidential nominee, participated remotely.
“The decision to hold this hearing now is reckless and places facilities workers, janitorial staff, congressional aides and Capitol Police at risk,” Harris said.
Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) warned that if additional Republican committee members become ill and are unable to physically participate in the committee vote, which is expected Oct. 22, Democrats would not help them provide the needed quorum to proceed.
Advertisement
But that would be largely a symbolic act, because Republicans could simply opt to skip a committee vote and bring the nomination directly to the full Senate.
Republicans are eager to get into a scuffle over Barrett’s religious views. Feinstein in 2017 told Barrett that the “dogma lives loudly within you,” responding to a 1998 article Barrett co-wrote in which she questioned whether Catholic judges might have to recuse themselves on certain issues that conflicted with their faith — specifically, the death penalty.
Many Republicans referenced the 2017 episode during their statements, but Democrats — burned by the backlash — made a conscious decision to avoid the topic on Monday.
“Did you hear one of us raise that issue?” Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) asked reporters Monday afternoon.
Advertisement
Republicans also referred to calls by some Democrats to add seats to the Supreme Court next year, an idea that Biden and Harris have refused to address directly.
“They intend to pack the court with more justices who will turn the Supreme Court into a genuine second legislative body,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). “It is outrageous.”
The electoral stakes of the process are significant. Conservatives who were initially skeptical of Trump in 2016 eventually supported his nomination in large part because of his pledge to appoint what he called “pro-life” judges. Republicans are hoping that a final Senate vote on confirmation — expected the week prior to the election — will remind GOP voters of the power of the presidency.
Graham is counting on the confirmation to energize conservative voters in South Carolina, where he is facing an increasingly difficult reelection race. Several other Republicans in difficult reelection races will get a shot at creating a viral moment during the hearing, including Cornyn and Sens. Joni Ernst of Iowa and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.
Advertisement
Barrett has a history of statements on divisive issues — surprising for a Supreme Court nominee — such as the healthcare law and abortion rights.
In an essay, Barrett criticized Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s 2012 opinion upholding the individual mandate under the Affordable Care Act. She wrote that he pushed the law “beyond its plausible meaning to save the statute.”
She was also critical of a 2015 healthcare case, King vs. Burwell. That challenge was widely viewed by legal experts as the weaker of the first two ACA lawsuits to land at the Supreme Court at that point. But Barrett said the dissent in the King case had “the better of the legal argument.”
There are signs, however, that Barrett won’t strike down the entire law if she is on the bench in time for the third legal challenge to the constitutionality of the law. She participated in a moot court event on the latest major challenge to the ACA at William & Mary Law School just one week before Ginsburg died. Individual votes of Barrett and the others on the eight-judge panel were not disclosed, but none ruled in favor of the GOP argument that the entire law should be invalidated.
Advertisement
As an appellate judge in 2018, Barrett signed on to an opinion that suggested the government could ban abortion based on a woman’s reason for having one.
At play in that case was an Indiana law that banned abortion in cases of a fetal anomaly or the gender of the fetus. The argument Barrett signed reasoned that the ban could be valid because Supreme Court precedent hadn’t considered what it called an “anti-eugenics” law.
“Using abortion to promote eugenic goals is morally and prudentially debatable on grounds different from those that underlay” prior Supreme Court rulings, the signatories wrote.
The Supreme Court later declined, without dissent, to hear an appeal involving that part of the Indiana law, leaving in place a lower court order that struck down the abortion restrictions as unconstitutional.
Advertisement
Barrett also signed her name to a 2006 ad placed by an Indiana group that called for an end to the “barbaric legacy” of the court’s Roe vs. Wade decision.
Staff writer Sarah D. Wire contributed to this report.
Coronavirus continues its spread around the world amid efforts to stem a second surge, with about 37 million confirmed cases and more than one million deaths.
In many countries which had apparent success in handling initial outbreaks, health experts are beginning to express concern as infection rates rise again.
Italy is preparing fresh nationwide restrictions in response to a recent increase in Covid-19 cases.
On Friday, the country recorded over 5,000 infections in a single day for the first time since March. Daily infections remained over the 5,000 mark on Saturday and Sunday.
Health Minister Roberto Speranza said new measures are necessary to curb the spread of the Covid-19 virus and avoid tougher measures later on.
Already last Wednesday, the country made it mandatory to wear face masks outdoors nationwide.
UK
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is set to announce details of new measures on Monday to deal with the rising coronavirus infection rate after the UK reported about 12,000 cases on Sunday.
The prime minister is expected to outline details of a plan to place areas in England in three tiers of “medium”, “high” and “very high” risk as the government struggles to curb the infection rate.
The three-tiered classification will include shutting down bars, gyms and casinos in areas placed under the “very high” alert level.
India
India’s coronavirus cases rose by over 66,000 on Sunday, making it the second country to cross the seven-million mark.
With the latest spike in Covid-19 cases, India is edging closer to overtaking the United States as the country with the most infections.
Indian health officials have warned about the potential for the virus to spread even more during the upcoming religious festival season which climaxes in October and November with the celebrations of Dussehra and Diwali. These festivities are usually marked by huge gatherings in temples and shopping districts.
US
Coronavirus cases in the US have seen an uptick in recent days as the country recorded over 50,000 new cases daily in the past four days according to the World Health Organization.
The US is currently the world’s most affected country with approximately 7.6 million cases.
In an urgent call for countries to prepare better for all catastrophic events – from earthquakes and tsunamis to biological threats such as the new coronavirus – data from the UN Office on Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) indicates that wealthy nations have done little to tackle the harmful emissions that are linked to climate threats which make up the bulk of disasters today.
“Disaster management agencies have succeeded in saving many lives through improved preparedness and the dedication of staff and volunteers. But the odds continue to be stacked against them, in particular by industrial nations that are failing miserably on reducing greenhouse gas emissions,” said Mami Mizutori, UNDRR chief, and Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction.
According to the UNDRR report – produced with Belgium’s Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters at UCLouvain – there were 7,348 recorded disaster events worldwide, during the last two decades.
Approximately 1.23 million people died – approximately 60,000 per year – with more than four billion affected in total; many more than once.
These two decades of disaster also caused $2.97 trillion in losses to the global economy, with data also indicating that poorer nations experienced deaths rates more than four times higher than richer nations.
By comparison, the previous 20-year period (1980 to 1999) saw 4,212 reported disasters from natural hazards, with 1.19 million deaths, more than three billion people affected and economic losses totalling $ 1.63 trillion.
Climate danger spike
Although better recording and reporting of disasters may help explain some of the increase in the last two decades, researchers insisted that the significant rise in climate-related emergencies was the main reason for the spike, with floods accounting for more than 40 per cent of disasters – affecting 1.65 billion people – storms 28 per cent, earthquakes (eight per cent) and extreme temperatures (six per cent).
“This is clear evidence that in a world where the global average temperature in 2019 was 1.1 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial period, the impacts are being felt in the increased frequency of extreme weather events including heatwaves, droughts, flooding, winter storms, hurricanes and wildfires,” UNDRR reported .
Despite the pledge made by the international community in Paris in 2015 to reduce global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, Ms. Mizutori added that it was “baffling” that nations were continuing knowingly “to sow the seeds of our own destruction, despite the science and evidence that we are turning our only home into an uninhabitable hell for millions of people”.
COVID-19 exposure
Turning to the COVID-19 pandemic, which has “laid bare many shortcomings in disaster risk management (despite) repeated warnings”, the UNDRR report recommended urgent action from Governments to better manage such overlapping disasters.
These hazards included known “risk drivers”, such as poverty, climate change, air pollution, population growth in dangerous locations, uncontrolled urbanization and the loss of biodiversity.
Chronic needs
By way of an example of chronic weather risks which should be the focus of better national preparedness measures, the agency pointed that shifting rainfall patterns pose a risk to the 70 per cent of global agriculture that relies on rain and the 1.3 billion people dependent on degrading agricultural land.
Despite the fact that extreme weather events have become so regular in last 20 years, only 93 countries have implemented disaster risk strategies at a national level ahead of the end-of-year deadline, Ms. Mizutori said.
“Disaster risk governance depends on political leadership above all, and delivery on the promises made when the Paris agreement and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction were adopted,” she said. “But the sad fact is that we are wilfully destructive. And that is the conclusion of this report; COVID-19 is but the latest proof that politicians and business leaders have yet to tune into the world around them.”
She added: “It really is all about governance if we want to deliver this planet from the scourge of poverty, further loss of species and biodiversity, the explosion of urban risk and the worst consequences of global warming”, in a joint statement with UCLouvain’s Professor Debarati Guha-Sapir.
Although the UNDRR report indicates that there has been some success in protecting vulnerable communities from isolated hazards, thanks to more effective early warning systems, disaster preparedness and response, projected global temperature rises could make these improvements “obsolete in many countries”, the agency warned.
Currently, the world is on course for a temperature increase of 3.2 degrees Celsius or more, unless industrialised nations can deliver reductions in greenhouse gas emissions of at least 7.2 per cent annually over the next 10 years in order to achieve the 1.5 degree target agreed in Paris.
Simon & Schuster Children’s is to publish author and illustrator Beach’s first picture book, secured in a three-title deal.
Simon & Schuster Children’s is to publish author and illustrator Beach’s first picture book, secured in a three-title deal.
Senior commissioning editor Polly Whybrow bought world rights for three picture books from Charlotte Ayeto at Kingsford Campbell. The first in the series, The Dragon with the Blazing Bottom: A Very Firey Fairy Tale, is due to publish in September 2021, with the second book publishing in May 2022, and a third following in 2023.
The picture book’s synopsis explains: “Sir Wayne’s dragon has lost his flame. Are his teeth too clean? Is his tongue too pink? Perhaps his diet is to blame. Not to worry – Sir Wayne has a meal plan of epic proportions, including a heat-seeking rocket, one burning bush, some sparkles and fireworks – the ones that go ‘WHOOOOSH’. Oh, and one very mouldy piece of cheese – almost as green as the snot from a sneeze — what could possibly go wrong?”
Commenting on the acquisition, Whybrow said: “There are only a few books which, when they land in your inbox, make you shout out loud, to the entire office, with lunch still in hand: ‘We have to publish this. We have to publish this RIGHT NOW.’ And so it was with The Dragon with the Blazing Bottom. Fantastically funny, wonderfully frivolous, and hugely farty, there’s not one child out there who won’t fall about laughing for this brilliant new series. Beach is one of the most naturally hilarious and gifted picture book talents there is, and we’re completely thrilled we get to publish him exclusively on our bestselling and award-winning S&S list.”
Beach is the co-author and illustrator of six books under the name Tyers & Beach, who have sold 10,661 books for £88,601 through Nielsen BookScan’s UK TCM. He said: “I feel like I have died and gone to picture book heaven. Polly and the team are quite simply the most effortlessly cool and mind-bendingly inspiring partners in crime I could ever have wished for. I am over the moon to have found such a magical home for my hot-bottomed dragon.”
1. Sixty Somethings recounts the lives of 67 women born shortly after the last war. The generation has been hailed as unique, remarkable, and keen to break with tradition. Now, in the autumn of our years, most of us are still creative and energetic. Writing about our lives seemed a worthwhile thing to do.
2. The Sixties was a key period in our lives. Our teenage and early adult years were exciting times although they weren’t all about sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll. More of us than before went to university and we were full of ideas and convinced we would change the world.
3. For the first time ever we, as young people, had a culture of our own. Music of many genres, written and performed by our generation, and telling the world what we thought, was a key feature of the time. Our clothes also attested to our identity. I still look wistfully at my white leather mini-skirt hanging hopefully in my wardrobe.
4. I have always enjoyed finding out about the details of everyday lives. As a child I used to conduct mini-surveys of my friends and families. My first research project during my primary years was investigating whether loo rolls were used up more quickly in our upstairs or downstairs lavatory.
5. The events, both trivial and significant, of my own life are also well charted. I have kept a daily diary for every single day of my life since the age of nine. It is a useful reference document although there is now rather a lot to wade through. Its contents are, however, for my eyes only.
6. My family has had a big influence on my interests in social research. Both my parents were sociologists and helped shape my ideas about social life and the nature of evidence. My uncle, Charles Madge, was one of the founders of Mass Observation in the 1930s that tracked people’s everyday lives through peacetime and war. I have picked up his baton in my current project that looks at older people’s reactions and experiences during lockdown.
7. Similarities and differences across generations have always interested me. The Sixty Something women saw themselves as very different from their grandmothers in both what they did and what they thought. I am now wondering if my own young granddaughter will have similar things to say about me in years to come.
8. Writing has always been a key part of who I am. I wrote very long stories as a child, produced many academic books and articles throughout my career, and I’m still going. Recently, however, I have also had a go with a novel and (hopefully) wry poems about the human condition.
9. The countryside is a wonderful inspiration for ideas. I live in a rural setting and go for long walks most days. Often I come home with a new idea for something I’m writing. As I’m usually with my partner, and don’t take a notepad, my best thoughts do unfortunately sometimes get forgotten.
10. The journey is important. Most of the time I take pleasure in what I do for its own sake. The destination is a bonus. So while I have found it fascinating talking to the Sixty Somethings and telling their stories, it will be all the more worthwhile if readers too enjoy what they have to say.
Despite legislation and initiatives aimed at preventing them, around three in every five workers suffer from MSDs and they remain the most common work-related health complaint in Europe, affecting workers in all jobs and sectors. Repetitive movements, prolonged sitting and heavy lifting are just some of the risk factors that contribute to these conditions, which can affect the muscles, joints, tendons or bones. The negative impact that they have on workers’ quality of life is clear.
At a press conference in Brussels to mark the official launch of the campaign, Nicolas Schmit, European Commissioner for Jobs and Social Rights, highlighted the urgent need to take action:
The Commission wholeheartedly supports the campaign launched today by the European Agency for Safety & Health at Work (EU-OSHA) to tackle the issue of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Ensuring the best possible work environment is critical for the health and wellbeing of the workforce, and therefore a duty of all employers. Many of us – 3 in 5 – have experienced backache, stiff muscles or a sore neck as a result of our work. This can severely affect our everyday lives, our productivity, and it can be detrimental to our physical and mental health. With the pandemic affecting how we live and work, we can all benefit from the guidance and resources published today.
The support of social partners and European institutions is also invaluable, with the German Presidency of the Council of the EU recognising the need to act on MSDs and pledging its commitment. Hubertus Heil, German Federal Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, commented:
MSDs affect every country in Europe. It affects all of us in different ways. Therefore, it must be managed in every European workplace –– from factory floors and hairdressing salons to hospital wards and offices. Therefore we give our full backing to the Healthy Workplaces Lighten the Load campaign.
MSDs also incur significant costs for employers and national health systems. Christa Sedlatschek, EU-OSHA Executive Director, emphasised that:
In addition to the human suffering caused, workers miss out on so many fulfilling aspects of their private and working lives. Those workers with MSDs are absent from work more often and for longer periods, are likely to be less productive while at work and often take early retirement. This is bad news for businesses and a huge burden on national economies. This campaign will highlight that early intervention and rehabilitation are vital and entirely possible. By working together and adopting good practice now, we can prevent MSDs in future generations of workers.
Measures to prevent and manage MSDs are often simple and inexpensive, and this is one of the key messages of the Healthy Workplaces Lighten the Load campaign. The campaign will reach out to workers and employers across all sectors, with a particular focus on high-risk sectors, such as health care and early education.
Supporting workers with chronic MSDs to remain in work will also be a key focus, along with the need to consider psychosocial risks and worker diversity, and to adopt collaborative approaches to MSD management — involving workers, employers, healthcare providers and other stakeholders.
Special attention will be given to emerging risks, arising from, for instance, digitalisation and new technologies and ways of organising work. This is particularly timely in light of COVID-19, which has forced many workers out of offices and into working from home. MSDs and home-based teleworking is a priority area for the campaign.
Finnish operator Elisa has announced the winners of the 2020 Finnish Books of the Year award, run by its Elisa Kirja e-book arm. Elisa had chosen a list of titles for the public to vote from. The exception was the newcomer category, in which Elisa Kirja itself picked the winner.
In the fiction category, the winner was Tommi Kinnunen’s “Defiance”. In the Information/biography category, the winner was Jari Tervo for his book about actor Veta-Matti Loiri. The winner of the crime category was Lenna Lehtolainen for “The Ripple Effect”. In the audiobook category, the winner was actor and author Ville Tiihonen. Elina Backman was named best newcomer for “When the King Dies”.
