En la práctica, el paso más importante para desterrar el especismo en nuestra vida es no comer alimentos de origen animal. Pero para ser consecuentes, también deberíamos dejar de utilizar otros productos que requieren que se mate o se haga sufrir a los animales.
No debemos vestirnos con pieles de animales. La aparición de granjas no ha hecho desaparecer la captura de animales silvestres. Anualmente, esta industria mata 60 millones de animales (casi el doble de la población española), 40 millones provienen de granjas y los 20 millones restantes de animales en libertad. Además, otros 60 millones de animales no útiles para la peletería (aves principalmente) caen accidentalmente en las trampas. Los animales que son criados en granjas específicas, viven en estrechas jaulas de alambre y bajo unas condiciones inhumanas, y recibiendo una muerte cruel y dolorosa, por gaseado, electrocución, inyección letal o desnucados. Según el tipo de animal, para fabricar un único abrigo de pieles se necesita matar a:
* 12-15 linces,
* 10-15 lobos o coyotes,
* 15-20 zorros,
* 60-80 visones,
* 27-30 mapaches,
* 10-12 castores,
* 60-100 ardillas.
Las pieles se consideran como un cruel símbolo de status lujoso y poco más. En nuestros días una gran parte de la opinión pública condena ya rotundamente el uso de animales por su piel.
Pero el cuero no siempre recibe tal condena. De hecho a menudo se considera como un práctico subproducto de la industria cárnica; ecológicamente correcto; un producto de calidad fácilmente disponible para todos. Sin embargo, el mito y la ignorancia rodean su producción.
Quienes compran productos de cuero pueden intentar tranquilizarse pensando que el animal del cual proceden ya había muerto para carne, de modo que poco importa que "utilicen" la piel restante para hacer un par de zapatos o una chaqueta. Sin embargo, sí importa porque haciendo esto estarán ayudando a subvencionar la industria cárnica. Comprar cuero asegura la continuidad de una industria masiva basada en el sufrimiento animal. No sólo el cuero, sino hasta la última parte del animal es vendida para hacer posible el sangriento negocio en su conjunto. La sangre se convierte en fertilizante o se usa como ingrediente de alimentos para mascotas y ganado. El pelo se saca para fabricar pinceles. Los huesos, pezuñas y cuernos se hierven para obtener la gelatina que se usará para elaborar jalea, cápsulas para medicamentos y vitaminas, dulces, galletas, película fotográfica, artículos de tocador, cosméticos y fósforos.
La industria del cuero intenta hacernos creer que su producto es biodegradable y una compra realmente positiva en comparación con los materiales sintéticos, para los que se preocupan por el medio ambiente. Sin embargo, lo que la industria del cuero no menciona es que en su estado natural el cuero no podría ser utilizado para hacer zapatos, botas, bolsos o cualquier cosa parecida, porque como materia orgánica que es se pudriría extremadamente deprisa, e incluso antes de que se descompusiera, tampoco podría ser usado porque en invierno se quedaría rígidamente duro y se rompería, o en verano excesivamente suave y flexible, con lo que esos zapatos de cuero no durarían mucho tiempo. ¿Qué hacen los fabricantes de cuero para evitar esto? Tratan el cuero de diversas formas anti-ecológicas para asegurarse de que no se pondrá rígido con el frío o flácido con el calor y, lo que es más importante, que no se pudrirá.
La arqueología ha encontrado muestras de cuero con una antigüedad de 12.000 años, y utensilios de cuero que se cree que datan del Neolítico y la Edad del Bronce en Europa.
Dejando a un lado que la industria del cuero usa una tremenda cantidad de energía, y que las granjas que crían los animales son de hecho un problema ambiental por sí mismas, la cantidad de residuos y contaminación generada por la industria de elaboración de cuero es sorprendente. El hedor de una curtiduría es insoportable. No sólo contaminan el aire, sino que también contaminan el resto del entorno con el uso de una multitud de sustancias químicas muy tóxicas que requieren plantas de tratamiento de aguas residuales. Entre las sustancias usadas en la confección del cuero están: cal, sulfato sódico, emulsionantes, agentes desengrasantes no solventes, sal, ácido fónnico, ácido sulfúrico, sales de sulfato de cromo, plomo, zinc, formaldehído, grasas, alcohol, bicarbonato sódico, tintes, colas de resina, ceras, derivados de alquitrán vegetal y acabados basados en cianuro. Las aguas residuales de una curtiembre también contienen grandes cantidades de otros contaminantes como proteínas, pelo y sal.
El público en general compra millones de toneladas al año de productos plásticos sin pararse mucho a pensarlo, en términos ecológicos. En comparación con la cantidad de bolsas y botellas de plástico que usa cada familia en un mes, un par de zapatos sintéticos de buena calidad en realidad no es algo tan malo. Esos zapatos o botas pueden durar varios años de desgaste intenso antes de tener que ser sustituidos. Por supuesto, el mejor factor sobre el calzado sin cuero es que ningún animal sufrió para producirlo.
Antiguamente no era fácil, pero en la actualidad se pueden adquirir zapatos y botas de material sintético en muchas tiendas, así como zapatillas de lona y goma. Cinturones, bolsos y otros artículos que antes sólo se hacían con cuero se pueden encontrar fácilmente en otros materiales. En el Reino Unido ya hay varias firmas dedicadas a elaborar calzado vegano y accesorios sin cuero, como por ejemplo Vegetarian Shoes o también Ethical Wares
La mayoría del cuero se obtiene de pellejos de vacuno, ternera, oveja, cabra y cerdo. Sin embargo, muchas otras especies son cazadas y matadas en todo el mundo específica mente por sus pieles. Entre ellas las cebras, bisontes, búfalos, jabalíes, ciervos, canguros, caimanes, elefantes, anguilas, tiburones, delfines, focas, morsas, ranas, cocodrilos, lagartos y serpientes. Algunas especies de estos animales están en peligro de extinción (se estima que el 25-30% ) y son capturadas y despellejadas ilegalmente, únicamente para obtener su piel.
Para vestir, no hay ninguna necesidad de comprar prendas de cuero, y existe una amplia gama de tejidos vegetales y sintéticos. Lo mejor son las fibras naturales como el algodón, para las prendas de vestir más comunes, especialmente las que estén en contacto directo con la piel. La lana también es un producto animal, aunque no se mata a las ovejas para obtenerla. Sin embargo, a los corderos se les corta el rabo, se les perforan las orejas con marcas y números y se les castra; también sufren frecuentes heridas al esquilarlas. Es cierto, que estos animales suelen vivir en condiciones menos intensivas, con un mayor contacto con el campo abierto, pero igualmente siguen sujetos a las necesidades productivas del ganadero.
La seda es otro producto de origen animal totalmente prescindible. Millones de gusanos de seda son sacrificados por la industria de la seda: para obtener un gramo de seda hilvanada mueren 15 gusanos. Es costumbre hervir los capullos que contienen la larva viva de la mariposa para obtener la seda. De esta manera se obtienen hilos de seda mucho más largos que si se permitiera salir a la mariposa. Los gusanos de seda indudablemente sienten dolor.
Aquí esta pequeña guía de ingredientes animales utilizados en productos de uso común, que puede servir para detectarlos en sus etiquetas:
ACEITES: En cosmética, los aceites de origen animal pueden proceder del bacalao, las tortugas (cremas nutritivas) o los visones (productos antiarrugas ) .
ALMIZCLE: (En inglés MUSK). Aceite obtenido dolorosamente del ciervo almizcleño, castores, rata almizcleña, jineta y de los genitales de la nutria. Las jinetas viven cautivas en condiciones terribles, los castores caen en las trampas, los ciervos son abatidos y las nutrias reciben golpes en los genitales para que segreguen el aromático aceite que se usa en perfumería.
COLÁGENO: Proteína fibrosa presente en los vertebrados. Suele obtenerse de tejido animal, principalmente bovino. Se utiliza ampliamente en cosmética.
GELATINA: Proteína animal que se obtiene del ganado vacuno, caballos y cerdos mediante el procedimiento de hervir en agua piel tendones, ligamentos y huesos. Se usa como espesante de gelatinas de fruta y budines, y está presente en numerosas golosinas, pastelillos, helados y en algunos casos yogures. Puede constituir un ingrediente de champúes, máscaras faciales y otros cosméticos. También aparece como capa protectora de la película fotográfica, tabletas de vitaminas y en cápsulas de medicamentos.
LACTOSA: Azúcar de la leche de los mamíferos. Presente en preparados oculares, alimentos, pastillas, cosméticos, productos cocidos y medicinas.
MANTECA: Grasa del abdomen del cerdo. Aparece a menudo en patatas fritas, alimentos previamente cocinados y otros productos. También en cremas de afeitar, jabones y cosméticos.
PLACENTA: Masa que envuelve el feto y que se elimina con el parto. Se utiliza ampliamente en cremas cutáneas, champúes, máscaras faciales y otros cosméticos; procede del útero de animales de matadero.
SUERO: Subproducto lácteo que se emplea en pastelería, galletas y dulces, y en algunos panes y quesos.
OTROS INGREDIENTES: Queratina, lecitina, estrógeno, progesterona, adrenalina, esteroides, ácidos grasos, insulina de origen animal y diglicéridos.
Según informa la UPA (Unión de Pequeños Agricultores y Ganaderos), en relación con la crisis de las vacas locas, el riesgo de transmisión de la enfermedad se extiende más allá del consumo directo, puesto que muchos productos contienen ingredientes procedentes del ganado vacuno. Entre ellos citan:
IS ANYONE STILL AWAKE? WOO-HOO! I WON!
"but i being otherwise." Alfred North Whitehead once said of scientists, "they do not discover in order to learn, they learn in order to discover." Human nature wages a battle between individuality and originality on one hand, and community and "fitting in" on the other. And where does it get us? Often -- trouble. Creating, pursuing originality, is often a destructive process. Every scientist, entrepreneur -- anyone chasing their bold dream -- is inherently making obsolete what came before. And as we all know, it sure adds difficulty to our lives.
First let me touch on originality itself. The debate of whether original thoughts still exist has gone on for centuries. In The Thought Gang, the British author Tibor Fisher wrote in his tongue-in-cheek way that all ideas were covered by the Greeks long ago, and we're just rehashing what we've collectively forgotten. It's a fear that resonates among many artists, especially painters these days because we've run the full range from purely representational to purely abstract.
It seems amusing to us, now that we've seen Duchamp's toilet bowl, Jackson Pollock's splattered canvases, and god forbid, even a Basquiat, to hear painters from previous centuries questioning whether all that could be done in painting had already been done.
Eugene Delacroix, a French artist in the first half of the 18th century, is an interesting case. His work, seen through modern eyes, seems very safe, but he was actually a passionate, individualistic man, who, while successful, was very much an outsider to the more popular, more formal school of David and Ingres. Delacroix loved color, movement, and vigorous painting, even though in the end, he always tempered his works to make them ready for "public viewing." But he laid the foundation, inspiring artists like Van Gogh to pick up where he left off and carry the mantle further.
Delacroix wrote two things in his journal that I want to share with you:
May 14, 1824 Paris
"The very people who believe that everything has already been discovered and everything said, will greet your work as something new, and will close the door behind you, repeating once more that nothing remains to be said." ... "Newness is in the mind of the artist who creates, and not in the object he portrays."
"What moves men of genius, or rather, what inspires their work, is not new ideas, but their obsession with the idea that what has already been said is still not enough."
One of the reasons why I love these quotes is they point out the hubris in assuming we've done all there is to do. It's a much safer bet that we are continually going to be tossed on our ass by something new. I hope so. Many are scared by this, but the creatives are terrified by the opposite and so we always try to buttress our belief that innovation can be attained.
Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot, a French artist twenty years younger than Delacroix, wrote in his notebook in 1856:
"Be guided by feeling alone. We are only simple mortals, subject to error; so listen to the advice of others, but follow only what you understand and can unite in your own feeling. Be firm, be meek, but follow your own convictions. It is better to be nothing than an echo of other painters. The wise man has said: When one follows another, one is always behind."
This transitions me into the next area I wanted to touch on. I believe that interacting with others leads to greater innovation than ivory-tower, closed-system work. It's something that a lot of artists wrestle with. For centuries, art academies taught through copying. Today, some artists say, "I won't look at what has come before, I won't go to galleries or museums, I won't read or talk to artists, and thus I can't help but be original." It's an argument with some validity, but I believe that you can't escape the human and historical context within which we live and work.
Originality and individuality cannot exist without its opposite. You might remember the old Monty Python line in The Life of Brian, where crowds of people have come to worship their proclaimed, and highly unwilling, Messiah. And he says to them, you don't need me, you can think for yourself, you are all individuals. The crowd chants back in unison, "yes, we are all individuals, we are all individuals." Far in the back, a tiny voice squeaks out -- "I'm not." You are original because you are different from something else.
John Sloan and Robert Henri were two American painters at the turn of this century who helped break the American art scene out of its stagnant conservatism. They didn't want to paint pretty, clean pictures. Sometimes their innovation was in their subject matter -- dirty street scenes of prostitutes in New York -- and sometimes it was simply in the vigour and roughness of their brushstroke in a landscape. Both were art teachers and, luckily for us, wrote down their thoughts in two wonderful books.
Robert Henri wrote in his 1923 book The Art Spirit:
"We are not here to do what has already been done."
"I have little interest in teaching you what I know. I wish to stimulate you to tell me what you know."
"Know what the old masters did. Know how they composed their pictures, but do not fall into the conventions they established. These conventions were right for them, and they are wonderful. They made their language. You make yours. All the past can help you."
In 1939, John Sloan wrote in Gist of Art:
"Sometimes it is best to say something new with an old technique, because ninety-nine people out of a hundred see only technique. Glackens had the courage to use Renoir's version of the Rubens-Titian technique and he found something new to say with it.
Cezanne may have tried to paint like El Greco, but he couldn't help making Cezannes. He never had to worry about whether he was being original.
Don't be afraid to borrow. The great men, the most original, borrowed from everybody. Witness Shakespeare and Rembrandt. They borrowed from the technique of tradition and created new images by the power of their imagination and human understanding. Little men just borrow from one person. Assimilate all you can from tradition and then say things in your own way.
There are as many ways of drawing as there are ways of thinking and thoughts to think."
Keith Haring, the late pop artist, also wrote an interesting comment in his Journal:
October 14, 1978, NYC
"No artists are part of a movement. Unless they are followers. And then they are unnecessary and doing unnecessary art. That rec offer is still out there from the post cold war essay. If anyone happens to read this, or the one in the other essay, and says something, they'll get a rec. If they are exploring in an 'individual way' with 'different ideas' the idea of another individual, they are making a worthy contribution, but as soon as they call themselves followers or accept the truths they have not explored as truths, they are defeating the purpose of art as an individual expression -- Art as art."
You can say something old in a new voice, and you can say something new in an old voice. If you want to get really fancy, you can even occasionally say something new in a new voice. I believe very strongly that originality still exists in art and painting, although it is getting tougher. Originality exists in something as simple as your signature. Too often we close off our creativity by over-thinking and seeking approval. Yes, we are social creatures, we need approval, we need community. But to those of us who are hard-wired to seek our own path, you have to remember to put aside the comments of fashion and the criticism of the establishment. Believe in yourself, pursue your individuality, and the journey will be worth the trouble.
I want to end with a quote from John Sloan. He was speaking on art, but his words can be applied to all individualism:
"Though a living cannot be made at art, art makes life worth living. It makes living, living. It makes starving, living. It makes worry, it makes trouble, it makes a life that would be barren of everything -- living. It brings life to life."
Which Shakespeare character has the most lines?
Hamlet, with 1569 lines, is the most loquacious Shakespearean character. Richard III is second, with 1161 lines. Iago is next, with 1117 lines, and then Henry V, with his 1063 lines. No other characters have more than 1000 lines. *Note that if we include all of the lines Henry V speaks in the Henry IV plays (when he is known as "Prince Hal"😉, then Henry V has the most lines of any character.
Which of Shakespeare's plays has the most lines? Which is the shortest play?
According to research conducted by noted Shakespearean scholar Tucker Brooke, Hamlet has the most lines (3924 lines) and The Comedy of Errors has the fewest (1770 lines). Macbeth is the shortest tragedy (with 1993 lines).
What can you tell me about the group 'The King's Men'?
In 1603, Queen Elizabeth I died and James the VI of Scotland became the new monarch, King James I of England. James loved the arts and was very generous to actors, playwrights, and other performers of the day. In particular, James I loved the theatre, and was captivated by Shakespeare's acting troupe, the Chamberlain's Men. Within ten days of arriving in London, James demanded that Shakespeare's troupe come under his own patronage. So they were granted a royal patent and changed their names to the King's Men, in honour of King James. It was indeed lucky for the King's Men that James held them in such high regard, for in 1603, England saw its worst outbreak of the plague in decades, and all the theatres had to be closed. Shakespeare and his troupe were not out of work, however, because James provided them with many engagements, performing for royalty outside of the infected London area. By 1608 the King's Men had a permanent winter home at the Blackfriar's Theatre and they played to a mostly rich and well-educated audience (they spent the summer months at the Globe). Their creativity began to flourish and they are credited with starting the new style of Jacobean drama.
What is the name of the work that some scholars have recently attributed to Shakespeare?
The work some scholars have controversially attributed to Shakespeare is a poem called Shall I die?. The poem, consisting of ninety lines, was first suggested to be a Shakespeare original by a professor at Oxford, Gary Taylor. Most people do not agree with Taylor's hypothesis because the poem contains weak and uninspired verse and looks nothing like Shakespeare's other work.
I need some information on two of Shakespeare's contemporary actors -- Richard Burbage and Edward Alleyn.
Richard Burbage was the son of James Burbage, the theatrical entrepreneur, and the brother of another famous actor of the day, Cuthbert Burbage. Richard Burbage played all the major Shakespearean characters, including Othello, Hamlet, Lear, and Richard III. He was a member of the Chamberlain's Men (later known as the King's Men) until his death in 1619. He was also a wonderful painter and, with William Shakespeare as his partner, he designed a ceremonial shield for the Earl of Rutland (1578-1632), to be used at a tournament in 1613 honoring James I. Edward Alleyn was also considered one of the greatest actors of Shakespeare's time. In 1585 he joined the Admiral's Men and, in 1592, he married the daughter of theatre owner and patron, Philip Henslowe. He was so popular that, when he decided to retire in 1598, Queen Elizabeth herself requested that he return to acting. He agreed, but retired again in 1604 and never returned to the stage. In 1623 his wife died and he remarried -- this time to the daughter of the great English poet, John Donne. He died in 1626. For more information on both actors, click here.
Were Renaissance actors respected?
Elizabethan actors were highly regarded. They were usually active members of the community, and beloved by most, even by royalty. Queen Elizabeth and James I were great patrons of the arts, and often they would associate with actors like Alleyn, Burbage, and Kempe. Queen Elizabeth personally asked Alleyn to come out of retirement in 1600.
Could you tell me where I find the text of "Who is Sylvia"?
The poem, "Who is Sylvia", is found in The Two Gentlemen of Verona (iv.ii.40).
How many plays, sonnets, and poems did Shakespeare actually write?
Shakespeare wrote 154 sonnets, and, depending on who you ask, he wrote 38 plays. The problem with finding an exact number for the plays is that there are a few dramas that some believe Shakespeare wrote and others refute the claim outright. Many think that The Two Noble Kinsmen was written by John Fletcher, and furthermore, there is a lost play called Love's Labour's Won that was listed among Shakespeare's comedies in 1598, but most critics do not mention it. Another lost play thought to be the work of the Bard was called Cardenio. Some even refuse to accept Henry VIII because it seems so different from Shakespeare's other work. Anyway, to be safe I'd say 38. All Shakespeare's poems are listed on my site. Four is the usual number cited, but, as with the plays, sometimes the number is six, when critics choose to include The Passionate Pilgrim and Sonnets to Sundry Notes of Music.
How many of Shakespeare's plays are set in Italy?
The plays in which some or all of the action is set in Italy are: All's Well that Ends Well, Antony and Cleopatra, Coriolanus, Cymbeline, Julius Caesar, The Merchant of Venice, Much Ado About Nothing, Othello, Romeo and Juliet, The Taming of the Shrew, Titus Andronicus, The Two Gentlemen of Verona, and The Winter's Tale. Keep in mind that some of these plays are not set exclusively in Italy.
Is Shakespeare the most widely read author of all time?
Shakespeare is the most widely read author in English speaking countries. His works are second only to the Bible in popularity. 90% of American high school students must read some work by Shakespeare, and all British students in high school must read Shakespeare at some point.
I need to know about the audience during Shakespeare's time.
Most of the poorer audience members, referred to as groundlings, would pay 1 penny (which was almost an entire days wages) to stand in front of the stage, while the richer patrons would sit in the covered galleries. The audience would have been composed of tanners, butchers, iron-workers, millers, seamen from the ships docked in the Thames, glovers, servants, shopkeepers, wig-makers, bakers, and countless other tradesmen. With the exception of the very rich members of the audience, their diets would have been rather plain. Bread, wine when available, meat, pudding, and a small assortment of vegetables would be the staples for the people of London and surrounding areas.
What types of entertainment did they have in Elizabethan England?
In Elizabethan England, during the times when plays were not completely outlawed, going to the theatre was the favourite pass time of the masses. In times of pestilence, when disease ravaged London, comedians would travel across the English countryside, entertaining farmers. There were also many days devoted to feasting, such as Mad Day, Midsummer Day, and Ascension Day (just to name a few), when people would drink and make merry. Dances were popular, whether you lived in London or in a small town, and so was getting together at the local pub for sing-alongs. Games like chess and checkers were extremely popular -- Miranda plays chess in 'The Tempest' and Queen Elizabeth herself was known to love the game. The upper classes also hunted for fun (shame on them), and engaged in tournaments of fencing. Reading was very popular, and most educated people could read their favorite books in more than one language. One other form of entertainment, called Bear Baiting, was popular for a short time but stopped after the staging of plays became popular. You can read more about this in my section called 'Elizabethan Theatres'.
What was Judaism like during Shakespeare's time?
Jewish communities were first established in England with the arrival of William the Conqueror in 1066. Although Jews soon began to play key roles in English economic development and flourished as doctors and tradesmen, they could not escape the rampant anti-Semitism that swept Europe. Jews were subjected to vicious persecutions, including charges of the ritual sacrifice of Christian children, which culminated with their expulsion in 1290 by Edward I. The exile lasted until 1655, when Jewish scholar Manasseh ben Israel obtained Oliver Cromwell’s assent for Jews to return to London. Thus, the Elizabethan people knew little about Jews, other than the false information handed down through years of propaganda.
Many people feel that The Merchant of Venice is anti-Semitic. Although Shakespeare crafts Shylock as an often sympathetic character, you can see anti-Semitism in the Merchant of Venice, as well as in other works of the day that had Jewish characters, like Marlowe's The Jew of Malta. Others believe that Shakespeare rises from the bigotry of the day, pleading for religious tolerance through Shylock's famous speech:
I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? hath not a
Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses,
affections, passions? fed with the same food,
hurt with the same weapons, subject to the
same diseases, healed by the same means,
warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as
a Christian is? (3.1.62-73) -- Shylock to Salarino
Can you tell me about revenge tragedy as a genre?
The revenge play was a genre popular in the Elizabethan and Jacobean period. Elements common to all revenge tragedy include: a hero who must avenge an evil deed, often encouraged by the apparition of a close friend or relative; scenes of death and mutilation; insanity or feigned insanity; sub-plays; and the violent death of the hero. Seneca, the Roman poet and philosopher, is accepted to be the father of such revenge
Originally posted by ark13This isn't the senate floor . Fillabusters(sp?) don't work here . I can trump all of that garbage with one simple post like this .
Which Shakespeare character has the most lines?
Hamlet, with 1569 lines, is the most loquacious Shakespearean character. Richard III is second, with 1161 lines. Iago is next, with 1117 lines, and then Henry V, with his 1063 lines. No other characters have more than 1000 lines. *Note that if we include all of the lines Henry V speaks in the Henry IV plays (w ...[text shortened]... the hero. Seneca, the Roman poet and philosopher, is accepted to be the father of such revenge
Originally posted by Moldy CrowSure they do. You'll be bored out of your mind, and won't feel like scrolling any more. And if you do read them, you'll learn something, and may find a hidden surprise 😉
This isn't the senate floor . Fillabusters(sp?) don't work here . I can trump all of that garbage with one simple post like this .
Definitions of Filibuster on the Web:
* A device, used only in the Senate, to delay or prevent a vote by time-consuming talk. It can be stopped only by a 60-member vote of the senators present and voting.
www.bcbsm.com/blues/hci/process5.shtml
* A time-delaying tactic associated with the Senate and used by a minority in an effort to delay, modify or defeat a bill or amendment that probably would pass if voted on directly. The most common method is to take advantage of the Senate’s rules permitting unlimited debate, but other forms of parliamentary maneuvering may be used. The stricter rules of the House make filibusters more difficult, but delaying tactics are employed occasionally through various procedural devices allowed by House rules. (Senate Filibusters, see Cloture.)
www.thecapitol.net/glossary/def.htm
* Delaying tactic associated with the Senate and used by the Minority in an effort to prevent the passage of a bill or amendment. Usually threatened but not executed. The House cannot filibuster as all debate is governed by rigid rules crafted by the Rules Committee setting the parameters for discussion and approved by the entire body for each separate piece of legislation. The Senate does not employ a rulemaking process.
www.naswdc.org/advocacy/resources/glossary.asp
* A delaying tactic of unlimited debate, used only in the Senate.
www.jcics.org/GovtGlossary.htm
* a tactic used to delay or stop a vote on a bill by making long floor speeches and debates.
www.nrdc.org/reference/glossary/f.asp
* Buccaneers were known in England as filibusters. From the Dutch for vrybuiter (freebooter) translated into French as flibustier. It is now used as a political term meaning to delay or obstruct the passage of legislation (as opposed to sailing vessels) by non-stop speech making.
www.sat.net/~bberlin/nautical.htm
* Delaying tactics to prevent action on a bill. In the Senate, which has a tradition of "extended" debate, a member may filibuster by speaking con tinuously (reading from the telephone directory, if it is so desired). But a member also retains the floor while yielding to a colleague for a question or by calling for the presence of a quorum (which necessitates a roll call). If the Senate recesses, a member regains the floor when the Senate reconvenes. In the House, filibustering is more difficult because members are ordinarily prohibited from speaking more than one hour and most legislation is
www.aacap.org/legislation/terms.htm
* Talking and debating a bill in an effort to change or kill it. Easier in the Senate than the House because of the Senate's more relaxed rules controlling debate.
www.ascd.org/advocacykit/glossary.html
* Tactic used in the Senate whereby a minority intentionally delays a vote.
cadca.org/CoalitionResources/PP-Documents/Glossary.asp
* Delaying tactic used in the US Senate by the minority in an effort to prevent the passage of a bill or amendment. The Senate's rules allow for unlimited debate in some situations, unless a 2/3 vote to end debate passes. A filibuster results when one or more Senators continue "debating" for as long as possible (sometimes for days).
www.npaction.org/article/articleview/381/1/124/
* an attempt by a Senator or group of Senators to obstruct the passage of a bill, favored by the majority, by talking continuously. Because there is no rule in the Senate over how long a member can speak, a Senator can prevent a bill from coming up for a vote by talking endlessly.
www.teach-nology.com/worksheets/soc_studies/president/vocab/
* An attempt to defeat a bill in the Senate by talking indefinitely, thus preventing the Senate from taking action on it. From the Spanish filibustero which means a "freebooter", a military adventurer.
www.york.ac.uk/depts/poli/fymoduleg/polia7.htm
* means the use of obstructive tactics, such as making prolonged speeches or using irrelevant material, in order to delay legislative action.
www.curriculumsupport.nsw.edu.au/hsie/speak/pages/glossary.htm
* term used to designate obstructionist tactics in legislative assemblies. It has particular reference to the Senate, where the tradition of unlimited debate is very strong. It was not until 1917 that the Senate provided for cloture (ie, the ending of the debate) by a vote of two thirds of the senators present. The filibuster has been used by various blocs of senators for different purposes; for example, by conservatives resisting civil-rights legislation in the 1960s, and by liberals resisting cuts in the capital gains tax in 1991. Attempts to reduce the cloture requirement have not been successful, partly because
www.citizen.org/print_article.cfm
* A time-delaying tactic used by a minority in an effort to prevent a vote on a bill that probably would pass if brought to a vote.
www.firstinfamiliesofnc.org/resources/glossary.html
* A French buccaneer in the Caribbean.
www.privateerdragons.org/pirate_dictionary2.html
* A tactic for defeating a bill in the Senate by talking with continuous speeches until the bill's sponsor withdraws it, or no vote can be taken.
www.abateofcolo.org/Tips%20&%20Info/Civics%20Glossary.htm
* A procedural tactic in the US Senate whereby a minority of legislators prevent a bill from coming to a vote by holding the floor and talking until the majority gives in and the bill is withdrawn from consideration.
highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0072481218/student_view0/chapter11/glossary.html
* a legislator who gives long speeches in an effort to delay or obstruct legislation that he (or she) opposes
* a tactic for delaying or obstructing legislation by making long speeches
* obstruct deliberately by delaying; of legislation
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
* ----Filibuster is the historical name, used predominantly in the 19th century, for private individuals who settled in foreign states with the intent of eventually overthrowing the existing government. The term is almost always applied to Anglo-American settlers in Latin America.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_(settler)
* A filibuster is a process, typically an extremely long speech, that is used primarily to stall the legislative process and thus derail a particular piece of legislation, rather than to make a particular point in the content of the diversion per se. The term first came into use in the United States Senate, where senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose. The term comes from the early 19th century Spanish and Portuguese
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_(legislative_tactic)
Originally posted by NordlysI'm with you Nordlys. Scrolling, watching grass grow, watching paint dry. If I'm up for big excitement I watch the washer spin.
Scrolling is another one of my favourite activities, besides watching the grass grow and following this thread. And that means I can even do two of my favourite activities at the same time now! That's just great! Thank you, ark! 😏
Originally posted by RookRAKOh yes, I forgot to mention the washing machine. Great stuff. It has lots of different programs, too. Much better than TV (that's why I don't have TV).
I'm with you Nordlys. Scrolling, watching grass grow, watching paint dry. If I'm up for big excitement I watch the washer spin.