Please join in a moment of centering silence so we can be fully present with each other this morning. And now let's get musically present by turning to the words for our in-gathering hymn, which you'll find inside your order of service. Welcome to another Sunday here at First Unitarian Society. It happens to be Super Bowl Sunday, or as some Packer fans might call it, Passover. But here we are at First Unitarian Society where independent thinkers gather in a safe, nurturing, and football-free zone to explore issues of social, spiritual, and ethical significance as we try to make a difference in this world. I'm Steve Goldberg, a proud, good-looking member of this congregation, and I'd like to extend a happy hello to those of you watching or listening at home. And a warm welcome to any guests, visitors, or newcomers. If this is your first time at First Unitarian Society, I think you'll find that it's a special place indeed, and we're glad you're here. Speaking of being here, being present with each other, this would be a great time to silence those pesky electronic devices that you just will not need at all for the next hour. So thank you for taking care of that. And speaking of need, if you're accompanied today by a youngster and you think that you need a more private space from which to enjoy the service, because you might get a little fidgety and that might embarrass your youngster, we have a child haven at the back corner of the auditorium and some comfortable seating right outside the doorway in the commons. And now the moment you've all been waiting for, the names of our volunteers. These are people who are volunteering their help this morning so that our service can run smoothly. And someday, if you're really lucky, and if you sign up to volunteer for a weekend service, you'll hear your name announced from this microphone just like you're about to hear these names. Thank you to Mark Schultz for operating the sound system. Thank you to Anne Smiley for being our lay minister. Thanks to Joan Heitman for greeting us this morning with her smiling face. Thank you to our ushers, Melinda Carr, Vivian Littlefield, Gal Bliss and Doug Hill. A special thank you to Gene Hills for hosting the hospitality and coffee after the service. And a special thank you, and if you see them up and about in the round in the future, thank Bob and Nancy Dot for donating today's flowers in honor of their, wait for it, wait for it, their 65th wedding anniversary. So if you see it, I don't believe they're here this morning. Maybe you're watching at home, Bob and Nancy Dot, but congratulations on your 65th anniversary. Thank you for sharing your joy by donating today's flowers. Just a couple announcements before we get on with the service today. First of all, if you have never heard Reverend Everett Mitchell talk about racial justice and the criminal justice system, you're in for a treat because Tuesday evening right here, he is going to be conducting a meeting, a session on that, and we get to hear quite a bit of insight regarding the issue of racial justice or racial injustice here in Dane County again Tuesday evening. And lastly, the cabaret calendar countdown continues 75 days from now, Friday, April 22nd. Right here, this place will be transformed into one huge party, including a musical extravaganza, auction, a gourmet feast, and an opportunity to raise money for that organization we love so well known as First Unitarian Society. So how many days until April 22nd? 75. 75, very good. You're paying attention already and the service has not even commenced. So that's a good sign. And it's a good service, by the way. I heard it at 9 o'clock, so please lean forward or sit back to enjoy the service. I know it will touch your heart, stir your spirit, and trigger one or two new thoughts. We're glad you're here. Good morning. One of the members of the FUS Open Poetry Group, and we're very pleased to have been, our members being invited to write the opening words for the three services this weekend. The opening words that I'm going to read, I wrote a couple days ago and they're entitled, it's a poem entitled, Choose Your Own Star. Choose your own star, whoever you are, a goal with a purpose to be of real service, brought in its scope to offer new hope. From a place you can be with your vision to see, achievements to strive for, with reasons to be more, a chance to advance past mere happenstance, to do something good, your path understood, whatever it be, to the highest degree, not a small trifle, but worthy, insightful, to follow your star and be who you are. And now we'll have the lighting on the chalice. If you'll stand and read the words in your program. As we kindle this flame, may it spark in each of us connection and commitment to this living tradition and to each other. And now if you'll turn to your neighbor and exchange friendly greetings. I want to take Jeff who didn't introduce himself, that was Jeff Glover and that was an original piece. Today's service is comprised completely of the words of members of this community. And I want to welcome any children who might want to come forward because we have a story today that was written by our very own Roz Woodward. How cool is that? So come on up here. Hi everybody. This girl is going to a play after this. I think it's already been a good day. All right. So these words were written by Roz Woodward and these pictures were drawn by her too. So pay special attention because I think it's really cool that people right here in this congregation are sharing their words and art with us. There was once a king of a very big kingdom and one night he awoke with a large headache. He tossed and turned so much that he woke up the queen. What is it my dear? The king said people are pounding on the palace doors. They don't want to help pay for all of the good things I'm trying to give them like roads and bridges and clean water. And that's the only way that I can pay for it. And now the whole kingdom is fighting over it. I don't know what to do. My head is splitting in two. The queen jumped off the bed. The king's head is splitting in two. She cried, call for a doctor. Maid woke the doctor who came in to look at the king. He felt his pulse and listened to his heart. And he said, I see no evidence that the king's head is actually splitting in two. But the chambermaid had already heard what she had heard. So she ran to the kitchen and alerted the cook who told the shoe cleaning boy who related to the stable boy who told the horse the king's head is splitting in two because the whole kingdom is fighting. Now perched in the rafter of that stable was a little screech owl that was woken up by all this racket. She overheard the stable boy shook herself awake and very upset. She took off immediately even though it was the middle of the day and she was kind of a night owl. This seemed to be important. The king's head was splitting in two. She flew towards the peaceful mountains of the east and on the way she told every bird she met the king's head is splitting in two because the whole kingdom is fighting. Pretty soon the entire bird kingdom was chattering and screeching all about the king's headache. It was such a ruckus birds were flapping around everywhere and everyone throughout the entire kingdom became upset. Folks even stopped fighting with each other to figure out what was going on. Meanwhile, the little owl had flown east. She landed at a little shack in a small village in a valley in the peaceful mountains and there was an old woman tending her garden there. She eked out a poor existence by helping neighbors in whatever way she could. The owl screeched out a message about the king's headache. Oh dear, this is very serious she muttered. I must make my way to the palace right away. She packed a little bag and started on the long journey to the castle. And as she walked she saw and heard all the birds screeching the same message the king's head is splitting in two. In a sense she told them it's all the worries and cares in his head if all your kingdom was fighting you would have a headache too. Pretty soon she arrived at the edge of the fighting kingdom. People had now stopped fighting with each other but now they were fighting with all the birds and everyone was trying to tell each other about the king's headache all at once. Now one of the old woman's gifts was that she knew how to talk to birds and animals. So she sat in the middle of the first town square that she came to and she called all the sparrows and pigeons and starlings and anyone else that would listen. And the townspeople they stopped fighting and yelling in amazement. The old woman explained the problem and a town meeting was called to figure out how to stop all of the fighting. It took a lot of work because they were so used to yelling at one another and now they had to learn to do something else. Particularly they had to learn to listen to each other and find a way to be helpful instead of hurtful and it is not easy to learn new habits. Everywhere she went the old woman taught the towns and the villages about the king's headache and by the time she reached the palace many months later the birds were carrying messages of peace from the east. The king was still tossing and turning and the doctors were still unable to treat the headache. The queen was still worried and the message had not yet reached the palace that the people had stopped fighting. So one morning the old woman knocked on the door of the stable and she told the stable boy who told the shoe cleaning boy who told the cook who told the chamber maid who related to the doctor who told the queen and she said to the king, my dear, your kingdom is no longer fighting. Let's go out and see this marvelous thing. So the king stopped tossing and turning and went outside to breathe the fresh air of his new peaceful kingdom. He saw people smiling and helping and playing with one another and his headache evaporated like dew in the sunshine. The next day he issued a proclamation to ask for help to build roads and bridges and houses and schools and all the other things that are needed for a peaceful kingdom. And the people instead of fighting pooled their resources and talents and pretty soon all the things that the king had worried about were taking care of. Few people ever knew the secret about the magical old lady of the east who could talk to birds and understood things about headaches. But now you know that secret and now you can help too. And I hope that you do. And one of the ways that the children help in this congregation is they give us lovely music. It says we're going to sing a hymn in our order of service, but I think we should listen to the kids sing another song. What do you guys think? Yeah? All right, let's do that. Maybe you give them a round of applause. Everyone here gets bonus points for coming to church on Super Bowl Sunday. I've been kind of risky last week and I asked you all to send me your visions of what a world would look like. That was the kind of world that you wanted to live in. I asked you to do a writing exercise to write out these visions and write yourself apart in it. And it was kind of risky because I thought maybe people wouldn't respond. And then I remembered who I was dealing with. You guys did. You sent me amazing visions. Enough that every single word in this service from the opening words to the benediction is your voice and your words. Words from this community. And I wanted to share a couple of the visions of the future that were pretty specific and well thought out. These are not my words. They are things that people have sent to me about how they want to see the world in the future. Some of them get into specifics of financials and politics. FUS is not endorsing any of these plans, but these are dreams that you all had. By 2025 or sooner, I want to live in a country where everyone is guaranteed a minimum income. My role in working towards this world is as a founding member of the Minimum Income Co-op, started by the First Unitarian Society in Madison, Wisconsin in 2015. In 2015, FUS invites everyone in the community to make two pledges. The first was to the FUS annual campaign. The annual campaign because of this was a huge success. And the total pledges for the 2015-2016 fiscal year increased 15% from the previous year. Because of the increase in budget, FUS was able to offer more programming, raise the salaries of current staff members, add additional staff. These additional funds helped FUS to be a force for good in Madison and Dane County. But what really got everyone's attention was the request for an additional pledge. This additional pledge pooled money from FUS congregants and was distributed directly to a family in Madison with no strings attached. The idea came from the long-running family-to-family Christmas program, where hundreds of FUS congregants donated their time and treasure to provide holiday gifts to struggling families in the Madison area. Using a similar strategy, the congregation agreed to support a family throughout the year to help them meet their basic needs rather than just a one-time gift around the holidays. Like family-to-family, the recipients of the support were selected by a social worker. At first, FUS could offer support to only one family, but as word got out, more people pledged to the co-op, and FUS was able to add an additional family to the co-op each year. This program not only helped the recipient families, it also demonstrated how families who had economic security could thrive. In fact, many of the early families that benefited from the program were able to increase their earned income enough that they withdrew as recipients of the co-op and instead became modest contributors. This model also caught on to other faith communities in Madison, and soon dozens of congregations were pledging to support area families as well. Currently, here in 2025, the Dane County Board is discussing a proposal to raise taxes to fund a similar program to bring more families up to a minimum level of income. Once famous for high incarceration rates of people of color, Dane County is now leading the country in innovative programs to decrease economic equality. And another person writes, We were in 2025 and now it is the year 2067. You all are very specific about your timelines. Climate change has brought a great deal of change to the planet. Thankfully, the rapid proliferation of renewable energy resources, mostly owned by community cooperatives and city governments, has allowed humanity to keep climate change to less than four degrees Fahrenheit. Also very specific about your climate change. The developing countries in 2000, and developing countries as in quotes, of the 2000s, including the continent of Africa now have large middle classes in democratic systems of government. Remarkably, they have avoided the worst polluting forms of industrial development, and in many cases they have pioneered new inexpensive energy technologies rather than face exploitation by multinational corporations, which have slowly atrophied as a result. China is now the world's most populous democracy, following a peaceful transition of power from the Communist Party. On this new, more balanced world stage, the United Nations has finally come into its own in enforcing human rights and environmental protections around the globe. In the United States, the long conservative drift that began in the 1970s was finally broken by a coalition of new movements, including Black Lives Matter, the environmental movement, and a newly invigorated labor movement that blossomed in the late 20s with mass demonstrations across the country. Beginning with the 2016 election of a great candidate, the federal government launched massive public works programs that employ millions of people, retrofitting cities with green technologies, and dramatically increasing investment in education while cutting back military spending. The two-party system finally splintered, allowing people a political choice closer to their own view. The old Republican Party is now comprised of the Evangelical Party, the Libertarian Party, and Business First, with an exclamation mark. To the left exists the Progressive Party, the Green Party, and the Old Democratic Party. The work of repairing the world is by no means complete. There is far more to be done, but as those who have brought about this change tell each other as they sit on shaded porches, the children who have grown up in this world need their own work and have their own dreams. Would you rise and join me in another hymn? We're going to sing about building a new way. Reverend Dr. Susan Ritchie is the secretary of the Unitarian Universalist Association, the head of our denomination. She has been a minister at a church in Ohio for nearly 20 years, and she teaches history, polity, and Unitarian Universalist identity to many people in our UU Seminary Identity Schools. And she claims to still have trouble with her elevator speech. When people ask her what Unitarian Universalism actually is, she sometimes still struggles. And one time she was at a conference, an interfaith conference with other scholars and colleagues. And she was trying to tell a woman who was not UU what Unitarian Universalism was, and she was describing it and kind of waffling a little bit. And the woman looked at her and she said, oh, you're post-Christian Protestants. And I was like, yeah, yeah, that is what we are. Because really we started with the Protestant Reformation, the seed for our denomination started with the Protestant Reformation, and then continued reforming to the Protestant Reformation's logical conclusion. I talked a little bit about this in October. With the Protestant Reformation, we questioned the hierarchy of the church. With the transcendentalist movement, we then questioned the idea that the Bible was fact and the Word of God, and also the need for Jesus in our salvation stories. And then we had a humanist movement that actually questioned the need for an anthropomorphic God at all. So in less than 500 years, we went from Catholicism to humanism. That sounds like reformation to me. And I would tell people this story in part of my elevator speech to say how we formed and who we are until I read the book Saving Paradise by Rebecca Parker and Rita Nakashima Brock. No relation. These women described the shift in Christianity from a time in the early church, the early church before Christianity was sort of co-opted by empire in those 300 years or so between Jesus and Constantine. They talked about a church that was based on Jesus' vision of paradise here on earth. The salvific event, the saving event of the early church, was not that Jesus was crucified. It was that he lived and taught his lessons of abundance and love and care for one another. The idea of the crucifixion being the salvific event of faith, that came much later with the Roman Empire that had its economic system based on slavery and its gladiatorial events, and they needed people to identify less with this lovely life in a garden and more with a suffering God. So they made that cultural shift. But this book describes a church in the early beginning formation that was just so cool and relevant and beautiful. I finally understood why Christianity has been so meaningful and so prolific, and it made me want to take on that mantle myself even though I don't believe in substitutionary atonement. I don't believe that Jesus died for our sins so we get to go to heaven. But this book made me realize that I could take on this idea of Christianity because the church in the early world was a bunch of people coming together to create beloved community. It was people that had different ideas about Jesus and different theologies. They read from different scripts. There was no canonized Bible and told different stories. But over and over again they talked about Jesus' message of feeding and healing the people. Jesus said, take care of one another, love one another, feed and heal each other. And that is my church. There's not much about dying on a cross in there. So I started reading these rituals in the early church that were not only beautiful, they were useful. Communion, communion in the early church was an agape feast. Not only did people bring bread and wine, but they brought grains and produce. Those who had more brought more. Those who had less brought less, and they would literally feed one another. And anointment in the early church was also useful and beautiful. Rather than it being some sort of special gift from God or a washing away of sins, people actually ground up healing herbs in oil and then they laid hands on each other and healed their physical and spiritual wounds. And even communion, or I'm sorry, even confession, which we think of as something that's a little shaming and we don't do it here in this church. Even confession was kind of a beautiful act in the early church because people didn't say, I was bad, I need forgiveness. People said, I don't like the way that I acted and there's something going on and I need the help of my community. It was a way to ask for help and be there for one another. Guys, I'm struggling with alcohol and I'm messing up. Can you help me? Guys, I'm feeling a particular greed come on me and I'm messing up. Can you help me? I think that that is kind of actually a cool way to go about admitting what's going on with us. And when I think about the church in that setting with people of all different theologies coming together to read from lots of different sources of scripture, not one dogmatic book, a place that was non-hierarchical, a place that took inspiration from Jesus and wanted to use the principles of his teaching to help one another and to make the world a better place, that doesn't sound super unfamiliar to me actually. And I wonder if instead of being post-post-post-reformationists, maybe we're just super traditional. And I think about the church in that context, all of the gospels, all of the gospels that were eventually canonized, Mark, Paul, Luke, John, they were in that church. They were not in the post-Constantine colonialized church. They were in that gathered community when they were writing. One of the biggest charges of the evangelical faith comes from one of the writings of Luke. It says, go forth and spread the gospel. And I think about that in Luke's time and I wonder what that meant because there wasn't a canonized gospel at that time. Luke meant, and then he goes on to say, go forth and spread the gospel to the poor and the oppressed and let the people in prison go. And if the gospel was about Jesus dying on the cross for our salvation, why would we just want to spread that to the poor? It didn't make sense to me. Apparently I'm not the only person it didn't make sense to and lots of people have gone back and revisited this verse. They went back to the original Greek and they translated it more closely and what the gospel actually says is, go forth and spread the good news. Go forth and spread the good news to the poor, to those imprisoned, to those oppressed. And I think about Luke in this church where the concentration was on how we can feed and heal and help one another and that makes a whole lot more sense.  Go forth and spread the good news. And funny enough, the Unitarian Universalist Association has the same advice. There's a woman named Tandy Rogers and for many years Tandy has been studying what makes congregations grow. There are all kinds of congregations that are growing right now at rapid speeds and they seemingly don't have much in common. Some of them are on the East Coast, some of them are on the West Coast or in the South, some of them started from a small amount, some of them started already large. They have all kinds of different theological backgrounds and different kinds of ministers and some don't have ministers at all. And the one thing that Tandy found that all of these congregations had in common was that they had a saving message that they had decided on and lived out in the world and that their ministers had taken this message into their own theology and talked about it with the congregation. I heard this in a workshop at GA and I thought, what the heck does it mean to have a saving message in Unitarian Universalism? Because we're talking about salvation and atonement and we don't really talk about those things anymore. And so I started thinking about it in terms of good news, in terms of a hopeful message, in terms of Luke and in terms of other faiths, because actually even though good news and salvation are very Christian terms, every faith has some sort of hopeful message, right? The Buddhists say, yeah, they're suffering, but good news, if you understand that it is temporary and you can detach from it, you can achieve this enlightened state. The Muslims say, if you worship Allah and do his works on this planet, most of which, by the way, are about taking care of each other, you will be rewarded. The Jewish folks, some of the more orthodox traditional Jewish folks might say, good news, we are part of God's chosen people and there's a Messiah coming. And the more reformed and humanist Jewish folks might say, we are part of a wisdom tradition that gives us all of the community and love that we need on this planet. Good news. Even the Wiccan folks say, we are part of a universal flow of all things, and the good news is, we have our own magical agency to direct part of that flow. Thinking about it in terms of all of these faiths and thinking about it in terms of what Luke said, there seems to be an underlying common thread. We are each individual, important beings that are connected to something larger than ourselves. And to me, that sounds like our first and seventh principles. Every person has inherent worth and dignity, and we are part of an interdependent web. Your voice matters. Every soul matters, and we are all connected.  Or maybe to put it simply, your voice matters, and you're welcome here. Your voice matters, and you are welcome here. Growing up as a Unitarian Universalist, that message has saved me many times, and in many ways. But then that also begs the question, saved me from what? Because, again, we're not really down with the eternal punishment thing, right? So, our reformation that moved away from words of salvation and atonement, that was really our Unitarian side. Our Universalist side never really got rid of that language because you can't have a religion based on universal salvation without the salvation part. It's true. So, what the Universalists did is they kind of thought about salvation in new terms. And in 1915, a man named Clarence Skinner was dubbed the prophet of a new universalism for one of my favorite essays ever written. It was called the Social Implications of Universalism. And it's a longerish essay in which he spends the first third of it getting really amped up about how wrong we have gotten this whole salvation thing. That salvation is not about the afterlife, that our actions have implications here on this earth, and that because we are so intrinsically connected, we can see, we can see the results of our actions in the faces of our fellow human beings. If we don't treat each other well, there will be human degradation in the form of poverty and depression. He goes into pretty direct detail about all of the things that he sees in the world and how they are direct results of the way that we treat one another. And he said, we need to go forth with visions of understanding, visions of the world that understand our inherent connection. He kind of wanted you to preach Luke's message. And so I asked you last week, I asked all of you to send me visions of what you thought the future could look like. I talked about Octavia Butler and how inspiring she had been for me personally, and I talked about how she wrote herself a world that she wanted to live in and wrote herself apart, and I asked you to talk to me about what the world would look like if it were the kind of place you really wanted to live in. And I learned two things, two themes. I learned a lot of things. I learned two major themes, and I have one wondering. The first major theme that I learned is that I really did not need to preach this message today. You guys get it. You guys totally get the individual worth and connection thing. You're there. I heard so many stories about making sure every voice was heard, whether it be through the democratic process or through non-hierarchical systems. I thought it was really interesting that more than one of you mentioned systems that were non-hierarchical because Octavia Butler actually talks about how the inherent flaw in humanity is hierarchy, and I didn't talk about that last week, so whether you made the connection or whether the spirit did, I thought that was pretty cool. And the other thing that I learned, oh, well, and you got this idea of universal connection too. You talked about the need to go out beyond our own spheres of comfort to make connections with people that you wouldn't normally see on Sunday morning or in your neighborhood or at your bridge club or whatever else you do to challenge yourself culturally and socially to really see a wide breadth of the possibilities of humanity. The other learning I had was that you all understand courage in a really intricate and amazing way. I've been preaching about the courage of Sojourner Truth and Harriet Tubman. I've been preaching about the courage of people who speak truth to power and live forth with these righteous bold actions. And you all reminded me of another really, really important part of courage, and that is vulnerability. The courage to look at your own predisposed notions of the world and question whether those are the only ones. You talked about your relationships, your relationships that you had with people that were in marginalized groups. Some of you even said, you were brave enough to say, this person talks about the oppression that they have experienced. I don't see it, but I know that I need to trust their story. Some of you talked about how you were uncomfortable with some of the ways that the world were and some of the actions that were being taken now. Some of you specifically talked about how you were uncomfortable with direct action and specifically uncomfortable with the Black Lives Matter movement blaming police officers for things. And you also said, you said, and maybe, maybe I'm uncomfortable because these systems privilege me and I don't want to deal with that. I don't want to feel all of the stuff that comes along with having to notice that I am in a privileged system and it doesn't help some people and it helps other people and that's tough stuff to deal with, so I'm going to have to sit with that. It was incredible vulnerability on your part because I think that we all get that message inherently, right? Any of us that have lived in a female body know that the most feminist, well-meaning man, doesn't know what it's like to walk through the world as a woman. Any of us who have ever been oppressed by income inequality know that even the people that are out there marching in the streets for fight for 15, if they're well off, they don't know that gripping fear in the pit of your stomach when you don't know how you're going to pay rent at the end of the month. And me, I don't understand what it's like to not be able to move freely up here, to have the freedom to just stand up whenever I want and go grab a book off a bookshelf or run to catch a door that's closing because my body is temporarily able and the wondering that I have after hearing these learnings and these beautiful visions is are you talking to each other about these visions? Erin Winkler is a professor at the U of M Ann Arbor and she came to talk to us about talking to our kids about race and she said, we can't talk to our kids about race until we are practiced in the conversations ourselves until we've tried out on people who do not experience the oppression of race, how to best word these things so we don't put it on them when we start to talk about it and we need to be practiced in talking to our kids. And I wonder if we're doing that because you folks have brilliant, beautiful, amazing messages. You were all fantastic ministers to me this week and I really appreciated it. I hope that you do. I hope that you use this community as a place like the confessions of the early world, like the good news of Luke. I hope that you use this as a place to talk to one another and share your dreams because you are so powerful collectively. Thank you. Thank you so much honestly for sharing with me this week. I hope that our collective vision of the world comes to fruition. It would be kind of a fantastic place to live. One of the visions I have of the world is that women will be able to access reproductive health care easily so our collection today is going to be shared with Planned Parenthood. Most weeks we have a book outside of the atrium that allows us to put the cares of our congregation in them and I would like to read a couple that we have today. Please hold C.C. Bouldyard and Susan Miller in your hearts and the death of Susan's niece and C.C.'s sister-in-law. Caroline Nosol, 24, was shot and killed last Tuesday in Cottage Grove. There is a GoFundMe page for expenses for her account. She was a friend of many members here. On Friday, Lisa West's father, Jim Vogelsberger, died from Alzheimer's disease. For the past eight years, he has been a model of living with acceptance while loving the good things in life that were still available to him. And to end on a positive note, congratulations to our own Steve Goldberg. Not only is he an attractive and active member of FUS, he is an attractive and active member in the entire community and he has been honored as one of Madison's agents for change by the best of Madison 2016. Give him a high five next time you see him. Will you all rise in body and or spirit to join me one more time in song number 1028, The Fire of Commitment? Please be seated from this congregation. It would be great if we made a concerted effort to read and learn about post-construction, the periods of old and now new Jim Crow in America, the Great Migration, et cetera. There are lots of good books available, but we can't stop there. We need to push ourselves to be uncomfortable, to be courageous, to reach out and find new ways to connect, attend offerings of the FUS equity team and Moses, visit Reverend Evan Mitchell's church for his invitation over a year ago, read Umoja or H-U-E-S publications, get involved at a new local chapter of the NAACP, help out with the UW Odyssey project, volunteer to work the Juneteenth celebration, volunteer at Madison Elementary Schools. Oh, there are so many possibilities. Looking out at all of you right now, I'd have to say I concur. Go in peace, return in love. Please remain seated for the postlude.


Hello and welcome to the update. I'm Chesa Salisbury, and I'm Jared Oates, and these are the latest stories Confirmation hearings for Trump's Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch began on Monday I just hope that Judge Gorsuch gets a fair hearing and is appointed to the court as soon as possible Said Merrick Garland who then punched a hole in a wall took a deep breath and walked away like nothing happened In a meeting this week with German Chancellor Angela Merkel Trump refused an opportunity to be photographed shaking hands with the foreign leader on a scale of one to ten how awkward was it nine Although it's weird that Trump wouldn't do this hand motion with the German Chancellor Seeing is that his supporters have no problem doing German hand motions all of the time Other reports indicate that Trump did not want to be photographed shaking hands with Merkel because he was worried that her hand Would crush his tiny tiny fingers FBI Director James Comey testified before the House Monday on claims that Obama wiretapped Trump and that the Russians Interfered with the election, but he spent most of the hearings reminding everyone but guys her emails According to the Washington Post a man from Grand Rapids, Michigan was admitted into the hospital last Christmas day He was complaining of stomach pains But it took doctors several days to figure out exactly what was making the man so ill it turned out that he had a Very rare strain of strep throat a bacterial virus that would end up claiming both his hands and his feet Fortunately, he was able to escape the occurrence alive high five No, Donald Trump spent his seventh weekend as president down at his resort in Florida Mar-a-Lago Golfing something he routinely criticized President Obama for doing during his presidency Turns out Trump was just surprised that a black guy was allowed on a golf course something that would never happen at a Trump resort Concerns are rising over the fact that taxpayers are on the hook for all this We're paying millions in taxes so that Trump can go golfing so that Melania can shop and stay at Trump Tower So that the Trump children can go on business trips When asked about the Trump family's costly expenses and added protection someone who voted for Trump in November said You know, I was with him when he wanted to ban all Muslims Deport 11 million Mexicans and build a wall, but now that he's hurting white people too. I'm just not so sure a Representative for the House Intelligence Committee will heard of Texas went on the record the other day giving President Trump advice about his claims That Obama wiretapped Trump Tower saying it never hurts to say you're sorry What does hurt however is having Justin Bieber lyrics come even this close to politics And this week's massive understatements President Trump was tweeting that North Korea is behaving very badly We took this opportunity to fact check North Korea is not in fact the name of President Trump's puppy very naughty North Korea bad dog Kim Kardashian recounted her experience of being robbed in Paris on this Sunday's episode of keeping up with the Kardashians Course robbed in Paris is also the name of a new reality show where Kim's younger brother Rob Kardashian goes to France When asked for comment Kim's husband Kanye West admitted that Kim was robbed But wasn't robbed as badly as Beyonce was at the 2009 VMAs In entertainment news with a hundred and seventy million dollar opening weekend Disney's Beauty and the Beast set records for a March opening All this after families across the nation had threatened to boycott the film because LeFou Gaston's henchmen was openly gay in this remake what because he seemed super straight in the cartoon That's all we've got for you this week. This has been the update take it easy


Good afternoon everybody. I'm Attorney Owens Desini. I'm the legal officer of UP Open University and I'm here to lecture on the responsible use of technology tools and online resources. When we talk of technology tools, I've grouped it into three groupings. One is academic learning. The other one is social learning and lesson planning. For academic learning, these are the applications that we can access in the Internet to help us make lessons fun, interesting and more effective. Some of the common applications are Khan Academy, Manga High, Fun Brain, Animoto, Newton, and other applications. For social learning, these are tools that use the power of social media to help students learn and teachers connect. Some familiar applications are Skype, Pinterest, Wikispaces, Coology, and other similar applications. For lesson planning, these are materials that help us pull together great lessons and design amazing lessons. These are for teachers and for students it helps us make memorable school projects. Some applications are teachers pay teachers, plan board, time toast, Quizlet, QR codes, and other similar applications. Those that don't fall under these three categories, I call other tools and these other tools help teachers and students stay connected, organized, and increase the ease of building multimedia lessons and learning tools. Some of the more common are Evernote, Dropbox, Twitter, Avery, Google Earth, Digo, and Jing. When we talk of technology tools, regardless of whether you use a laptop or your desktop or your iPad or your phone, what it really talks about is that you're accessing applications over the Internet. And when you speak of responsible use of these technology tools, there are certain things that we need to remember. The first rule that I would like to emphasize is that these applications have acceptable use policies or some call it their fair use policies. These are policies where the creator has restricted how you use their platform or how you use their website or their application. The safe rule is that you follow these acceptable use policies. That's the general rule and very basic. The second rule is that there are certain things that we have to avoid when we're using any kind of applications regardless of their acceptable use policies. And these are acts that fall under the general category of cyber bullying. In cyber bullying, the acts differ regardless of the situation or the circumstances. It will be based on a case-to-case basis. Some examples I have listed today are flaming. Flaming is an online fight using electronic messages with angry and vulgar language. Harassment, which are acts that are repeatedly sending nasty mean and insulting messages. Denigration, sending or posting gossip or rumors about a person to damage his or her reputation or friendships. There's also impersonation pretending to be someone else and sending or posting material to get that person in trouble or in danger or to damage that person's reputation or friendship online. Outing is the act of sharing someone's secret or embarrassing information or images online. Trickery is the act of talking someone into revealing his secrets or embarrassing information and then sharing this online. Exclusion is the act of intentionally and cruelly excluding someone from an online group. And cyber stalking is the act of repeated, intense harassment and denigration that includes threats or creates significant fear. These acts that I've mentioned fall under the category of cyber bullying. We should avoid these acts. Now, aside from cyber bullying, there's also the concept of cyber threats. Cyber threats are direct threats or distressing material that are posted online and this consists of general statements that make it sound like the writer is emotionally upset and may be considering harming someone else or harming himself or herself or committing suicide. What's the reaction to this? As I said, if we are to avoid cyber bullying, cyber threats we have to report. Why? Because if you see any of these acts being committed or if you see any distressing material posted online, it is extremely important to report them in order to avert any damage to property or to persons. To sum it up, with respect to the responsible use of technology tools, I suggest three rules. One, look at their fair use policy and comply with it. Two, avoid engaging in cyber bullying. And three, report cyber threats. Now aside from technology tools, I'm supposed to discuss also the responsible use for open education resources. What are open education resources? I've chosen three definitions because this concept has been defined over and over again. The first definition I chose is the one coined at the UNESCO 2002 forum on open courseware. The definition states that teaching, learning and research materials in any medium, digital or otherwise, that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits access, use, adaptation and redistribution by others with no or limited restrictions. The second definition is by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. This definition states that OER are teaching, learning and research resources that reside in the public domain or has been released under an intellectual property license that permits their free use and repurposing by others. And the third definition is that of the OECD or the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development that says OER are digitized materials offered freely and openly for educators, students and self-learners to use and reuse for teaching, learning and research. Of these three definitions that I chose, I've combined elements of OER. First, free use or freely accessible. Second, educational purpose for teachers and learners. Third, it resides in the public domain or openly licensed. Fourth, it covers all type of digital media. And fifth, it covers use, reuse, repurposing and modification of information. Now, OER given these combined elements and when we talk about it with regard to responsible use, we need to talk about the intellectual property code. Why? Because this is where the concept of copyright is embodied. OER are basically materials that are available online and when there's a material, somebody created that material and that somebody owns the copyright over that material. So if you talk about responsible use of OER, we need to discuss the concept of copyright. Copyright is embodied in the intellectual property code. The definition of copyright is that it is the exclusive legal right given to an originator to print, publish, perform, film or record literary, artistic or musical material and to authorize others to do the same. I would like to point out the provision in the intellectual property code regarding copyright. Under section 230 of the intellectual property code, the law mandates that schools and universities shall adopt intellectual property policies that would govern the use and creation of intellectual property with the purpose of safeguarding the intellectual creations of the learning institution and its employees and adopting locally established industry practice fair use guidelines. This means that if you are an institution and we know that schools are always the bastion of intellectual creations you are mandated to protect these intellectual creations and you're mandated to set down policies whether restrictive or open policies will depend on the policy that the school would want to push. Now, given that I think an example would be in the University of the Philippines. We have the rules governing the intellectual property used by the system and this is followed by all constituent units of the university and this governs the licensing of copyright trademarks and all kinds of intellectual property that's created within the university. When we talk about intellectual property I want to be clear that this does not only cover copyright. It covers a lot of other intellectual creations like trademarks, patents, industrial designs but for now I'd like to center on copyright because that is what is crucial to the use of OER. As I said copyright is the exclusive right of the person who created that material to print it, publish it, perform it, film it or record it. It covers literary, artistic or musical material. So when you see these materials online, just because they're online it doesn't mean that this is not covered by copyright. It doesn't mean that this material is open for you to use and access. So the rule should be always assume that the resource is covered by conventional copyright terms. Sometimes this is called the all rights reserve terms. Now there are exceptions to the copyright rule. The copyright rule says that if you're going to use or access that material you have to ask permission. Copyright regime is a permission regime. You always have to ask whenever you use it, you access it, you reproduce it or you make derivative works of that material you always have to ask for consent. Now there are exceptions to asking for consent from the originator. There are several exceptions but I would like to focus on two which is very crucial for OER use. And these two concepts are public domain and fair use. Before we discuss public domain, the first exception to the copyright, I want to explain the scope of copyright first. Copyright is confined to literary and artistic works which are original intellectual creations in the literary and artistic domain and they are supposed to be protected from the moment of their creation. What does this mean? It does not need registration for our rights to be protected if you're the originator. For instance, I scribble a note or I'm listening to a lecture during class and I wrote a poem on a paper. The moment I put down my pen, that work is already protected by copyright. No registration is required to establish this right. It is protected from the moment of creation. But for purposes of proof that the original author created this work, our law allows us to deposit a copy of the work with the National Library. The National Library will require you to deposit a work and it will stamp a date on it so that it knows that on this date you created that material. A similar way would be to just create the work, put it in an envelope, mail it to yourself because the post office will stamp the date when it was received. But for purposes of access and for purposes of deposit with the government, the National Library is there to provide this service. Now, aside from knowing what are the copyrightable objects, I would like to be able to give you samples of what they are so that if you created one and I happen to mention them, then you know that that right is copyrightable. So for literary and artistic works, we have books, pamphlets, articles, and other writings. We have periodicals and newspapers, lecture sermons, dissertations, letters, dramatic and musical compositions, choreographic works, works of drawing, paintings, sculpture, original ornamental designs, works of applied art, illustrations, even maps, plans and sketches, charts, three-dimensional works relative to geography, topography, architecture, or science. Drawings are plastic works of a scientific or technical character. Photographic works, including works produced by a process analogous to photography like lantern slides, audiovisual work and cinematographic works, and works produced by a process analogous to cinematography are any process for making audiovisual recordings, pictorial illustrations, computer programs, and other literary, scholarly, scientific and artistic works. Obviously, OER falls under this category. Now, aside from knowing if your work is copyrightable, you have to know who the owner of that copyright is. If you are the user of the material and not the originator. Now, there are rules as to determine who the owner of copyright. One, if there's only one creator, which is the author, then he's the owner. But if he dies, his heirs and his assigns will own his copyright for a period of 50 years. We will discuss this later on. If there are two or more creators, then all authors shall be the joint owners of the copyright. And in the absence of agreement, their rights shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership. If the work is commissioned, the person commissioning the work will own the work, but the ownership of the copyright remains with the creator, unless there is a written stipulation to the contrary. This can be agreed upon by the parties. For all your visual work, the copyright is owned by the producer for purposes of exhibition. But for all other purposes, it is owned by the author of the work, the producer, the author of the scenario, the composer, the film director, the photographic director, all together as co-owners. Now, if the work is anonymous, you don't know who wrote the work like, I think, Ibon Adara. It's a classic work that we don't know who wrote it. Then the author is undisputably known, the publisher shall be pursued to be the representative of the author. For employees that produce material during the course of their employment, the employer will be the owner of the copyright. If the material is the result of the regular functions of that employee. Now, so we know what are covered by copyright. Now we know how to determine who's the owner of the copyright, but what are the rights of the authors or the creators? There are two general categories of the rights of authors. One is the economic rights and the moral rights. Economic rights is the right to reproduce the work or any portion of the work, to dramatize it, to translate it, to adapt it, make abridgments or different arrangements or transform the work. Economic rights also covers the first public distribution of the original and each copy of the work by sale or other forms of transfer of ownership. He has the right to rent it out, he has the right to publicly display the original or a copy of the work and other communications to the public of the work. Moral rights, as against economic rights, the moral rights cover the right of the author to require that the authorship of the work be attributed to him. To say that Rowana S. Decini may dispel him or this presentation, that's the right of attribution. Another right covered by moral rights is the right of the author to make any alterations of his work, prior to or to withhold it from publication. He also has the right to object to any distortion, mutilation or modification of the work or other derogatory action in relation to his work which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation. And lastly he has the right to restrain the use of his name with respect to any work not of his creation or in a distorted version of his work. Now as I said there are two exceptions of copyright. One is public domain and the other is fair use. In discussing public domain we have to know what it means, what this public domain means. This simply means that when the copyright of the work has expired and yes there's an expiration of copyright, then the work falls into what we call the public domain. When does a copyright expire? Copyright protection expires as a general rule at the lifetime of the creator plus 50 years, which means if Julie created a poem, during her lifetime she has copyright over this poem but when she dies her heirs will have copyright over that same work for 50 years. After 50 years from her death that poem now becomes public domain. What does that mean? Public domain means we're now free to use it without asking for permission from Julie because she's dead but also from her heirs. Now there are special rules that you have to consider regarding expiration of copyright and its ownership. When you are joint owners the lifetime plus 50 years is taken from the last surviving co-owner. When the work is anonymous the 50 years is taken from publication if it's published. If it's not published the 50 years is computed from its making. If it's work of applied art the 50 years is computed from the making. If it's photos audiovisual works the 50 years is computed from its publication but if not published then 50 years from its making. I'd like to point out that public domain is what OER always emphasizes. When you say open, open education resource, open would indicate that you're free to use it and usually the exception to that copyright is public domain because the copyright has already expired and so this material is open for access and use of students or teachers alike. Now let's go to the second exception of copyright which is fair use. Fair use is embodied in section 185 of the Intellectual Property Code. It's a very long definition. Fair use I have to admit is a very complicated concept but in that definition you can find certain examples like criticism, comment, news reporting and teaching. These are exceptions to copyright which fall under the definition of fair use but it's not always the case that just because it is a news reporting or you use it for teaching that your use will be considered fair use. How do you determine fair use? There are four tests for this and this is based also, our law is based on the US law which uses the same test and they call it four-fold test. The first test is the purpose and character of the use. The question is are you creating something new or are you just copying? In determining this test we have to consider that non-profit educational purposes are generally favored over commercial uses. Criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship or research would always be bent towards fair use. Transformative and not merely reproductions for example quotations incorporated into a paper or work mixed into a multimedia product will always be interpreted as fair use. The second test is the nature of the copyrighted work. Are you publishing the work for the first time ahead of the author? So if unpublished it's more likely to weigh against fair use. This will not be fair use if the work that you copied is unpublished. Now, fair use tends to apply more on the other hand broadly to non-fiction than fiction. For example, it will apply more fairly to art, music, poetry and feature films. The third test is the amount of substantiality of the portion used. Are you taking too much or are you taking the heart of the matter? The rule is that the more you use or the more you copy the less likely it is fair use. However, sometimes even uses of small amount may not be fair use also if it takes the heart of the matter. The heart of the matter is simply a short, for example it's a short clip from a movie which may be acceptable unless it takes the most extraordinary or creative elements of a film. So then that will not be considered fair use because you are taking the heart of the matter. The fourth test is the effect of the use on the potential market. The question you should ask is are you competing with the source you're copying from? This is the most complicated test because you have to investigate the market and determine if the work is being sold or licensed so much so that the potential market for the work is prejudiced by your use of the material. Remember these four full tests although they are not full proof. They're the tests used by the courts to determine if someone's use of a material will fall under fair use and will not be considered copyright infringement. One rule to remember with fair use is that giving the author credit doesn't let you off the hook. Giving credit and fair use are completely separate concepts either you have the right to use the material or you don't. Attribution will not change that fact. This is the same as infringement versus plagiarism. The former is the violation of the rights of the author while the latter is the act of taking the original works of another and presenting it as your own. Now I said that there are two exceptions from copyright that is public domain which we earlier discussed and fair use. There's a third but this is not an exception to copyright because it is actually based on copyright. It's more of a licensing regime and this is what we see in the internet embedded in some materials that we use and reuse and that's the Creative Commons license. What is the Creative Commons license? Creative Commons is a licensing regime to share creative works by offering several copyright licenses which they call the CC license. They offer it to the public free of charge. It aims to build a richer public domain and counter a pervasive restrictive permission culture which copyright is trying to encourage. It does not supplant the rules on copyright but it is actually based on them and it allows creators to share their work on conditions of their choice. There are several kinds of CC licenses. The first one is the attribution license. This is the most common. What is that and how do you use it? This license tells you that you are free to share and adapt that material for any purpose even commercially for so long as you give the appropriate credit to the creator and you must provide a link to the license and you must indicate if the changes were made and you cannot suggest that the creator endorsed you. If you do not follow these rules or there's some modifications from these rules that you can't follow, then you will always have to ask permission of the author. That's the attribution license which is identified by the word buy when you look at the CC license. The second license is the share-alike license. That's indicated by the words SA. Now what does this license mean? This license has the same terms as attribution with an additional element. It will require you that if you copy, distribute, display, perform and modify the work, you must distribute any modified work on the same terms. Not more restrictive, but on the same terms. If not on the same terms, again, you must get the permission of the author before you can do anything with this work. The third CC license is the non-commercial license indicated by the letters NC. What are the terms of this license? Again, this license has the same terms as attribution, but in addition, you may not use this material for any commercial purposes. Otherwise, you have to get the permission of the author. The last is the non-derivatives license, which is indicated by the letters ND. How do you use them? This license has the same terms as attribution, but only over the original copies. That means if you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you can't distribute the modified material. Otherwise, you have to ask the permission of the originator. I have discussed with you the responsible ways of using technology tools and OER, but I want to summarize what we've talked about. For responsible use of technology tools, we have to be aware of the terms and conditions and acceptable use policies of different websites that offer technology tools. Know the behavior, what behavior it acts to avoid, and immediately report any violations of this act. Second, we define OER as online resources that are freely accessible because they either reside in the public domain or are openly licensed under a CC license or they are used under a fair use principle and the materials are used, reused, modified, or repurposed by teachers and learners alike for educational and research purposes. Closely linked to the responsible use of OER is a clear understanding of what copyright is. We are required to know first if the material is copyrightable. Second, if it is, who is the owner of the material? Third, whether or not it is an all rights reserved copyright or subject to a less restrictive copyright regime such as the Creative Commons license. Fourth, whether it belongs to any of the exceptions, the exceptions being public domain or the material is under the concept of fair use. I guess that sums up my presentation for today. Thank you very much. Have a good day.


Kentucky continues to set new records for COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and ventilator use each day. Governor Andy Beshear says the current surge is straining the state's healthcare system. We cannot handle more sick individuals as our hospitals are at such a critical point. As of today, 60 of our 96 hospitals are reporting critical staffing shortages. And as of today, we have the fewest available ICU beds. And at any point in this pandemic with only 90 adult ICU beds available statewide, that is the lowest number that I can remember seeing during the course of this pandemic. And the lack of beds is not just bad news for COVID patients. Folks, our hospital situation has never been more dire in my lifetime than it is right now. That means if you get COVID and need to be hospitalized, there has never been a greater likelihood that there's not a bed for you or your family members or your friends. At the same time, it means if you were in a car accident today and you need emergency treatment, that that emergency room has never been more full than it is right now. As a result, the governor is drastically expanding the state's use of National Guard teams to assist local hospitals. So today, I'm announcing that along with the four hospitals that already have National Guard teams on the ground at their facilities, we're deploying and have authorized the deployment of an additional 310 soldiers and airmen that will be going to assist 21 more hospitals. They will assist with non-clinical functions within the hospitals for a maximum of two weeks. 10 to 30 members will be deployed to each facility next week. They are helping again with the logistical and administrative support to allow hospital staff to focus on patient care. Here at Pikeville Medical Center's Heart and Vascular Institute, we have assembled a comprehensive team of cardiac specialists bringing expertise from all regions of the nation and the world. We have coupled that with cutting-edge technology, providing them the best equipment and operating rooms available. The result is comprehensive cardiac care for the people of our region that is second to none. The Heart and Vascular Institute at Pikeville Medical Center. Local hospitals receiving National Guard teams include Highlands ARH in Prestonsburg, Tug Valley ARH in South Williamson, and Kentucky River Medical Center in Jackson. Pikeville Medical Center and Hazard ARH were included in the first round of hospitals. But while the National Guard members are providing critical services to hospitals, Governor Beshear says everyone has a role to play. So we've got to have everybody wake up. And although with too many stories of folks, is there about to be intubated saying, can I take the vaccine now? The answer is no. And we hope that you're going to get off that ventilator as opposed to the other alternative.  We need you to wear a mask because your community hospital can't treat that next one of your neighbors that needs help without your help. Other measures the state is taking to deal with the surge include utilizing FEMA medical and EMS teams, assisting heart-hit hospitals with testing, and sending nursing students to help staff hospitals in need of additional support.


So this goes in the mouse brain. Hi, my name is Liv. I'm 17 years old and I attend all who study discrimination in Denmark. And I've always for whole my life been quite interested in science and especially in nature. Both animals in general but also the human body. I'm Noemi Mamejore. I'm an assistant professor here in Aarhus University in Denmark. And my research interest is about understanding how the brain copes with thread signals that are learned by experience compared to thread signals that are innate. So this goes in the mouse brain. Were you surprised to see the type of jobs that we do here? Yeah, I was. I didn't know that you also collect your own data and also analyse them afterwards and write your papers afterwards. I didn't know that. So then it's very, very thin. Today has been very fascinating. I've enjoyed it a lot. Following you around and seeing what you work with and how you work. I really enjoyed seeing how passionate you are about your work which motivates me a lot too and inspires me to follow my own journey. Yeah, it's been very interesting. I think today has helped me open my view of how different scientists tend to work and what sort of opportunities there are with science.


Everybody forced tier ripping a four box case of 2021 National Treasures football hobby for Hang Y Good luck hang seals there Here we go, man 2021 NT football while we pull the shield for someone for Adam and elements a minute ago Let's see if we get an NT shield Just pull shields for the rest of the night. That'd be awesome Thank you the shield Logo man's and shields all night. That's all we need Uh, we got a Carson Palmer 23 of 49 Darn on moony 94 of 99 Hope so patrick patch card deem me and harris 26 of 49 Next cards are really cool Dude, this is this is sick Five of five a dolphin's a logo patch of ronnie brown Player worn ronnie brown. That's really cool, man Eight of 25 on the dak prescott patch card rookie dual jersey divante smith jalen waddle 23 of 99 All right, auto is now rookie auto purple tommy tremble six of 49 Jersey auto herman moore numbered six out of 25 That's nice. Derek Carr auto here eight of 10 on the Derek Carr Nice hit on that one And a first edition signatures RPA book nodgie harris 56 of 99 These look really cool three color patch for the Steelers or the Steelers card there There you go hang why Grats again, buddy 56 out of 99. Come on big true rpa here. Let's see it trevor There's a few that are in the product other thick box Deandre swift 11 of 32 There's a zach wilson 46 of 99 treasured rookie patch card amari cooper 40 of 49 Patch card tj. Hopkinson six out of 25 get a huge game yesterday He a freaking huge game one of the best games for a tight end. I think I've seen for like fantasy or just anything So good, dude jersey card chiefs joe montana four of 99 Rookie dual jersey michael parsons and patrick sertan the second Rashaun slater rookie auto 15 out of 35 Sucks that he got hurt. He tore his what bicep.  It's a tie law patch auto 11 to 25 4 color tie law patch a true rpa of mica parsons as well 29 of 99 Really good box better than the first I'd say we're getting better here 29 and 99 a true rpa mica We'll get those two rpa's mag for sure Two more boxes hang right Here we go jerry rice 23 of 25 with a patent manning 62 out of 99 Jersey card amari cooper 45 out of 99 Jersey card cam makers 81 out of 99 Curtis martin jersey 95 of 99 rookie dual patch pat fry mooth 79 of 88 He had a good game too. I think rookie auto christian bar more 47 of 90 Love bar more. He's a beast Jersey number rookie auto there. Oh really pretty hit here Elijah more field pass rookie auto 41 of 99 Both field passes. Yeah field passes gorgeous. Definitely I mean honestly probably the nicest card they have in the set As far as like looks It's fantastic Got a joe green auto 10 to 10 nice mean joe That's nice That's nice As real nice rookie glove signature zack wilson seven of 10 That's right Two color glove relics seven to 10 wilson's back, baby Come back victory for the jets Very nice glove relic rookie auto Z willy all right all right, I mean Big truck here right here would be freaking awesome to close this case out. You don't have to wear gloves to have a glove relic It's like every time I pull a nolan ryan relic auto. It's like a bat relic auto Picture bat relic auto every time the best receiver on the jet sack wilson He did catch a touchdown Dual threat right there. He's like with danian's almondson chase claypool three of 10 tg hawkinson 87 of 99. I mean chase claypool Like caused pick his first pick. Let's let's be real here Directly handed it to the to the db Jersey card brand that I uke 37 of 99 He just like did tip drill right to the db Come on cooper cup touchdown and then another one and then another one and then another one. He's having a good game 11 catch 95 yards. That's a really good game. Yeah, I'm just down. I'm down way too bad Patch card miles gaskin 15 and 25 nice gas can Like the harrow. I saw just wearing once, you know rookie patch card terrace marshal jr. Six of 25 rookie dual jersey justin field 71 of 99 rookie nfl gear dual material auto Dwayne escridge 97 of 99 champ bailey auto 96 of 99 Last couple here a dan marino auto 39 of 99. Oh my god Dude this next card is Wild looking this home like I want to say break This is a personal break Look at this thing dude. Look at this thing prodigy RPA one of one with the flying Elvis logo remand rey stevenson That is ridiculous Congrats hang why I think that's a very good case Yeah, one of one remand rey. I would say so prodigy rpa the flying Elvis dude.  This also has that red trim with a beautiful color match all over the place here.  Yeah nice chin chin patch Thank you. Hang we appreciate it man.


I love One Piece, but I hate this. Hello and welcome to the Grand Line Review, your source for everything One Piece. My name is Liam and I have opinions because today we are here to talk about what I consider to be the absolute worst aspect of One Piece, something that at its most potent comes close to genuinely enraging me. And that is Oda's wildly inconsistent use of death. But wait a minute, Grand Line Review Man, haven't you made a video on this topic before? And the answer to that unsolicited question is sort of. I've gone through some of the worst fake out deaths in the series and I do talk about this in a lot of other videos, but that's only because it continues to be absurdly relevant. In fact, at the time of writing this, we are at chapter 1,015 of the manga and the concept of untrustworthy deaths is more relevant than ever before. So we're going to go through what holds this otherwise brilliant series back and detail some of the most egregious examples that would have any other author being mocked in the streets or, I don't know, wherever it is that they live. And it's all going to begin with a quick round of rest in, Pete, no wait, you're still alive. A very simple mini-game, the rules of which are as follows. Three characters have all of a sudden, quote unquote, died in One Piece, but it is going to be your job to guess which one actually stays dead. Should you guess incorrectly, then your punishment will be to subscribe to the Grand Line Review, also resulting consistent injections of One Piece culture administered directly into your YouTube feed.  So who will it be, A, B, or the third one? Choose your unfortunate character now and we shall reveal the answer in three, two, one, and bam, it's none of them. None of them are staying dead because Oda can't help himself. So if you guessed incorrectly, and at this point I would say roughly 100% of you did, then you know things to do and please do say hi in the comments below if you are a new member of the Grand Fleet, welcome. To really get into things though, I do want to back up slightly because a lot of what I've said so far can be leveled as a general criticism of Oda's abilities. But on the contrary, as with most aspects of storytelling, Oda is a certified master of how to wield death as an effective concept, which is actually one of those things that makes this issue ever, ever so much more frustrating, but think of some of the most memorable scenes in One Piece. Chances are a lot of them are going to come from flashbacks and there'll be stuff along the lines of Belmere sacrificing herself for Namia Nojiko, Dr. Hira looks heartwarming last moments or even very recently, my name is Oden and I was born to boil. These scenes are extraordinarily powerful and they're not exclusive to flashbacks either. I mean, if I were to mention characters like Whitebeard, Ace, Pedro or even the Going Mary, just name dropping them will generally conjure this mixture of great respect and somberness because they all involve examples of how to use death to its best possible effect. So it's not that Oda is in any way some sort of inferior author thing who is incapable of handling the concept. It's more that there are several select occasions, a lot of select occasions, where he chooses to shoot himself in the foot by giving characters heartbreaking death scenes only to later negate their entire effect by revealing that this character is in fact alive. To put it in terms of fine art, it would be kind of like if Vermeer decided to paint girl with a pearl earring, except instead of using the face we know today, Vermeer said, eff it and drew a smiley face with a crayon. In this case, Vermeer did know how to paint. He knew how to paint very well. He just chose not to do it for reasons, reasons that will be hotly debated by frustrated future historians. That is us with one piece. A lot of the time Oda's use of death can be just like utterly baffling. And even worse than that, it can actively harm the series going forward. Because Oda is an incredibly greedy man. He likes to have his cake and eat it too.  And at that point, you'll just find any old randoms cake to just have and eat as well. So to recap, Oda is now three kegs that Etchera Oda simultaneously has and is eating. And at this point, Oda has a big problem and it's not diabetes. The problem is that he is completely addicted to keeping non-flashback characters alive. However, he is also simultaneously addicted to writing death scenes for dramatic impact. And these two addictions, they do not interact well together. We're talking situations like Pell, Pagaya, Pound, Diggaran, Bonkley, Gecko, Moria and more ever so many more, including some spoilery manga characters. Each of these examples were given an overly dramatic death scene only to not actually follow through with that whole concept. And thus I suppose kind of ruin everything. Now, before we move on to ruining everything, let's ask ourselves, what is a death scene? Exact definitions can differ, but death scenes are essentially a full stop on a character. Something that succinctly wraps up their involvement in a story generally accompanied by some kind of grand action or offering of last words. They do vary quite greatly but that is your stereotypical death scene. And to examine this with an actual death, let's take Dr. Hiraluk.  And the whole event was a full stop on everything that was Hiraluk. His story was done and beautifully so. Now, weirdly enough, if we examine Pell, we also hit each and every single one of those beats. His grand action was to save Alibana from Crocodile's bomb.  Then the Falcon heroically exploded, putting a full stop on everything that is Pell. His story was done and beautifully so, except no. That wasn't at all, at all. Because for no justifiable or at least viewable reason, Pell survived this impossible explosion and is alive and well to this very day. And before people do the inevitable, like the common thing, no, it was not because of 9-11. That is an urban legend that has never been proven, but it doesn't really matter because even if it was true, that was not the reason for every other character. Pagaya, his death scene was crowned by the grand action of pushing his daughter out of the way of Enel's deadly strike, an absolutely beautiful display of parental love that ended up amounting to nothing because he survived this death scene as well.  Bound then had quite an extensive monologue offering both first and last words to Chiffon for the speech that included the following. Let me just say one thing at the end. Congratulations on your wedding. After which point he was struck by Oven and that was the beautiful end of Pound, except, no, no, it wasn't, because he somehow lived and escaped Whole Cake Island all on his own. Bon Clay, of course, had a very similar experience. His death scene also had the grand action of allowing Luffy and the other Impeldown prisoners to escape. In this case, Magellan also invited Bon Clay to quite literally state his last words. After which Bon Clay met his heroic end to the tears of readers and characters alike. Except, not, because that also didn't happen. As in an event that can only be described as somehow, he escaped Magellan and is now the new queen of level 5.5. And that aspect is the most infuriating thing of all. The fact that Oda puts these characters in completely inescapable situations only to reveal that they have miraculously escaped but without an explanation as to how. I think I'm just gonna say it. It's greedy, it's greedy, it's harmful to the experience of the narrative and worst of all, for one of the greatest authors of our generation, it's kinda lazy. Because just as with satisfying death scenes, we also know that Oda is capable of writing great fake death scenes as well. Think of stuff like Nami killing Usopp during Arlong Park or Kiyoshiro killing Komorasaki on Wano. Those fake deaths were wonderfully done and not only do they serve a purpose but they have satisfying explanations for survival. In this case being that the killers were both in on the fake out. Whereas the really frustrating ones like Bon Clay, they are real deaths that sort of end up being fake in retrospect with no explanation whatsoever. And when we encounter this as Cindy Lauper would say, time after time again, we get to a point where we're 1000 chapters into one piece, characters appear to die and it's just completely impossible to believe because Oda has a history of creating gut-wrenching emotional death scenes only to I suppose forget that he's actually killed the character. What's worse though is that in the large majority of cases there's also no real reason to keep the character alive. I like Pel, I like him a lot but he serves no purpose being alive except that to consistently remind us that he should be dead. Why did Oda keep the guy alive? He is like the sideist of the side characters who has no grand purpose going forward. And apart from a kind of fun cover story why did he keep Pound alive? Nothing that happened in that story was worth robbing the character of their crowning moment in the series. Should any one of them had actually died we would remember and treasure them in the same way that we treasure the aces, the Pedro's, the white beards and the going Mary's. And when rereading or rewatching the series we would appreciate the Pel's, the Pagans and the Pagans oh my God, the Pound's and the Pagaias. Whatever they are we would appreciate them more because we know our time with them is limited. Instead of going back on the series encountering them and remembering that any and all drama around them is entirely hollow. This isn't just restricted to general good guys either plenty of villains get these death scenes as well like Bellamy. You may not remember this but there was a scene in chapter 303 where it was heavily implied that Dolph Lamingo used Sarkis to kill Bellamy which at the time was quite a shocking and brutal ending. It really said a lot about Dolph Lamingo that he would kill Bellamy in this public and brutal way except it doesn't because he didn't and he is Bellamy, here he is, very, very alive. Or Dr. Hogback who was supposedly crushed to death by the foot of Oz. There's also Gekko Moria being assassinated by Dolph Lamingo after the paramount war. Or one of my personal favorites, Moscato who was actually killed on Holkeek Island and then I kid you not, literally resurrected. In chapter 829 a rampaging big mother takes Moscato's lifespan resulting in his death. Then in chapter 830 upon examining the body it is literally confirmed that Moscato is indeed dead. After which point Charlotte Bookman wanders over to the like the sole tax collectors and assumedly demands that every last second Moscato's lifespan is returned which apparently works because Moscato returns gloriously in chapter 901 to do nothing, nothing at all. He just stands there. He doesn't even get his own panel and thus ends Moscato's involvement in the series. And I just don't understand why we needed to go that far for a character like Moscato. I remember reading his death and thinking that there could not have been a more perfect introduction to big mom. This was the new world. This was an emperor of the sea. Someone to be deathly afraid of and this was just generally serious business. All of which was immediately like washed away because this is one piece and in one piece even when characters die, they don't die. Oh, and you know who we haven't touched on yet? Igram. This is one of the very first false deaths in the series where he disguises himself hilariously mind you as Princess Vivi, setting out to see only to be blown up. But Igram of course inexplicably survives and not only that, but even without a ship he manages to make Twyla Basta alive and well before the straw hats do. Now, in this particular instance, an argument can be made that Missal Sunday engineered the explosion in a very convoluted way. So it was not to kill Igram because she was secretly working against Crocodile, but that's not the point. The point is that to the readers and watchers this was played as a dramatic death scene that had an impact. And seeing Igram alive goes on to lessen if not outright to completely negate the effect of that scene because it teaches us at a very early stage in the series that there are no consequences. We can quite literally watch a character get blown to pieces and not feel anything because in the end there will be no actual loss. That character, no matter how guaranteed their death may seem, will in fact be fine. And just on that, one of my favorite things ever is that Igram showed up to Alabasta with a single band-aid on his face. So that's all the explosion managed to do to him. One band-aid's worth of damage. And look, it's a personal and stylistic choice by Oda, but in my opinion, it does make his job of conjuring drama and tension so, so much more difficult because it now takes something even greater than the mere threat or even the actual action of death for us to feel anything. Luckily for us, Oda is an extraordinary author and he does make it work regardless. However, with that said, I'm really sick of seeing death scenes for anyone in one piece because they're mostly empty experiences. Whatever feeling they're trying to convey be it fear, sadness, heroism, it doesn't matter. It never matters because it falls flat in the grander context of the series. And to expand upon that a bit further, let's imagine that we're not talking about death scenes for a second because we can apply what Oda does to just about anything like, say, a romance scene. Let's say we have two characters who give in to their passions, we see their relationship take a heated step forward and we experience a good dose of story and character progression. However, if this encounter was treated in the same way that Etcher or Oda treats death, then the very next day, these two characters would act like they've never even met. And we, the audience, would never be given an explanation as to why that relationship doesn't exist anymore. It would be treated as if it never happened and thus negate the entire purpose of having the romance scene to begin with. It would be confusing, annoying, and if it happened more than once, then it would make you skeptical of all romance scenes going forward in the series. Almost as if they only existed as a cheap way to briefly tap into your emotions without having any lasting effect on the story. And that is exactly how I feel about death in one piece. It's not as if I'm some sort of brutal ghoul who just demands more carnage and bloodshed in my fun cartoony pirate manga. I just don't wanna be repeatedly lied to. If you're writing a romance scene, I expect relationship development. If you're writing an exposition scene, then I expect information, information that will be important for the future. And if you're writing a death scene, then I expect, well, I expect some death. It really is kind of the bare minimum that a death scene should provide. And yeah, it might be fun to subvert that expectation every once in a while, but at this point in one piece, my expectations are subverted if a death scene actually ends in someone dying. But what continues to embaffle me is Oda's inconsistency on this matter. Because as much as we like to joke about him being unwilling to kill anyone outside of a flashback, that's also not true. There are plenty of secondary characters like Monet, Virgo, and Absalom who are almost startlingly casually killed. And going right back to the beginning of one piece, Hikama the Bear was very deadified, as was the random bandit who got shot in the head by Lucky Roo. So whether we're talking about the dawn of the series or late stage one piece, Oda has never been afraid to pull the trigger. In fact, I'd say he's quite trigger happy. It's just that a lot of the time he ends up regretting that decision and ends up narratively reviving certain characters, pretending that, oh, they never died. No, that death scene didn't happen. If I had to make a solid argument as to why Oda does the thing that it is Oda does, I'd say it's because he wants to convey a strong message of hope. Within flashbacks, anything goes because tragedy is something that we need to live with. But in the modern day, we need things to shine brightly. So no matter how ridiculous it may seem, our good characters will remain alive sometimes. But I can't help but feel used every time Oda does this. If you don't want these miscellaneous secondary and sometimes even tertiary characters to die, then I have this amazing solution. It's called, don't kill them.  Find another way to generate drama. You are legitimately one of this world's greatest storytellers, you can do it. Because I'm genuinely at the point where I read any death scene outside of a flashback in one piece and I feel nothing, absolutely nothing.   But then my mind interjects and goes, yeah, the eyes do have a point. It does indeed look that way. However chances are that character is going to be fine. And so I just ought to awkwardly move on without really taking in or experiencing the intended feeling of the scene. I'm just gonna quickly dip into some manga spoilers here so that I can find, I guess, vent at modern events. So please just skip to this time if you don't want spoilers we will be back shortly with your regularly scheduled whatever this is. But for everyone else, here we go. So the thing that prompted this whole video was chapter 1014 and 1015. Featuring what looks like the deaths of Kandro and Kiku.  He was pronounced dead by the scabbards earlier in the raid only to come back. So even ignoring Oda's history of atrocious character revivals, why should any of us believe that he in particular is dead this time either? To be fair, he may very well be. But here's the really bitter aspect of this situation. Even if Kandro and Kiku are dead, they've both been robbed of that impact. Because instead of being in the moment and feeling that loss, we're just sort of sitting here being skeptical and expecting Oda to do what Oda more often than not does. So it's a complete lose-lose situation. Either they are dead and we couldn't truly feel the impact of that moment with them or they're alive and Oda has once again kind of wasted all of our time with false drama. Back out of spoiler land now to put all of this into perspective, I don't know how many of you have been reading or watching long enough to remember the exact week where Ace died. But let me tell you how things went down online. No one believed it. A hole was put in Ace's stomach by Akainu, Ace gave his last words and collapsed on the ground. The chapter was even literally titled The Death of Port Garcia's and still no one believed it. Could not have been a clearer death scene. However, due to our experience with death scenes in one piece, the fan base was extremely cynical. There was even a popular theory that because this chapter was titled The Death of Port Garcia's, then the next one would be titled something along the lines of the birth of Goldie Ace because even that, even that was a more reasonable thought than Oda actually killing someone. And I think to this day, that's why I don't really feel the death of Ace as much as others do because by the time it was confirmed to me, the moment was well and truly gone. It was more of a shock curiosity, like, oh, Oda actually did it rather than a gasp, Ace, he's dead, sort of reaction, you know? And that is the danger of constantly crying wolf with all of these fake out deaths. When you get to a real death, something you want your audience to properly, properly feel, they're just gonna remember the last hundred times you said there was a wolf and its impact will be diminished minimal and in my case, almost entirely retrospective. I will say that when I reread Marineford, I had an entirely different perspective because I knew what was going to happen to Ace. And so I ended up appreciating his scenes a lot more as well as that moment of his death. I just really wish I could have done that when I was reading it week to week as well. The most hilarious of things, however, is that Oda knows this. He understands exactly what he is doing and according to all reports, he's not exactly a fan of it either. For example, in an interview conducted in Shueisha Weekly Playboy in 2007, Oda said the following, revival of a human isn't natural, right? If a mangaka ends up reviving the dead, he shouldn't have killed that character in the first place. I have hated the revival of dead characters ever since I was a kid. It made me doubt a mangaka and I could not agree more with this. If an author kills someone, then they should generally stay dead and if they get revived, then it does make me doubt them. However, Oda then went on to offer his solution to this problem in the exact same interview. My characters don't die even if they are thrown into a desperate situation and by desperate situation, I guess Oda means anything that could cause death, like say a city destroying bomb, maybe just off the top of my head. But honestly, this line basically translates to, my characters don't die even if they die, which I will remind you, we have quite literally seen in one case with the death and resurrection of our Lord and Savior, Charlotte Moscato, minister of Gelato. But here is another insane thing. It's not as if resurrection can't be used well either and Oda knows how to use it well. In one piece, there are very select moments of this, such as the entire concept of Brooke's devil fruit and existence. That is resurrection used amazingly. Or for a less profound example, there was that time on Sky Pier where Enel restarted his own heart. That was really cool and it heightened the terror of facing off against him because this was a man who defied the very idea of death just simply via his devil fruit. Compare that to saying Moscato's resurrection and all of that really does is reinforce the idea that even if you are facing off against the full wrath of an emperor of the sea, there will still be no enduring consequences. And this is in danger of becoming a slight tangent, but just quickly when loud people on the internet claim that Big Mom is something of a joke, I think this act is an underrated contributing factor to that. If Big Mom had permanently killed her own son during this introduction, Charlotte Linlin would probably command a lot more respect than she does. Because I love her, but at times it can seem like Big Mom has all of the power in the world, but her actions never seem to leave any form of lasting impact, which is a very strange dichotomy. Not too dissimilar from this death discussion in general. The death scenes we've spoken about during this video hold a lot of power in the moment, but no lasting impact. And on some level, yes, you do need to respect that. Oda has his own philosophy that he usually sticks to and far be it from some guy thing in Australia to tell him that he's wrong. But in my personal experience, this has done a lot more harm to One Piece than it has good. Just as Oda's thoughts on revival make him doubt the mangaka before him he utilized it, his refusal to kill characters despite giving them highly, highly dramatic death scenes makes me doubt him. I still have overwhelming faith in his, frankly, inhuman ability to create the best story ever told, but it is not 100% faith because each and every time Oda offers me a somber yet delicious tray of death, I just don't believe him. There's only so many times you can give me a bland sour apple and pretend it's a juicy, juicy orange. And there is nothing more immersion breaking than actively refusing what an author is serving you. Thankfully, it doesn't happen often in One Piece. Almost every other area of storytelling is superb and beyond my expectations, but please, please, please stop giving me this one specific horrible, horrible dish. But if you'd like another deliciously prepared video, then do check out this one, examining some of the worst fan takes in One Piece. Very fun, so I look forward to seeing you there.