The Caribbean has long been a luxury and exclusive destination, a hang out for the rich and famous and visitors to the region will not be surprised why.

With a fantastic range of beautiful and unique countries, the Caribbean has much to offer the long haul traveller, from calm sandy bays to rugged mountainous jungle interiors, teeming with wildlife.

Whether you are seeking a relaxing beach holiday or a lively fun filled break, an all-inclusive holiday in the Caribbean can provide the perfect setting.

Almond Resorts have a great range of all-inclusive properties across Barbados and St Lucia that will ensure you never want to leave, and with many great family options, the kids are sure to have a fantastic time too!

When it comes to food, Almond have an option for all tastes, from freshly caught seafood and western classics to sumptuous local dishes to make your mouth water.

For the active minded, there are a great range of activities available on land and at sea from snorkelling and kayaking to golf and banana boat rides.

For more information on all inclusive Caribbean holidays, visit Almond Resorts or call 0870 907 9601.

.: Inclusive - We are intentionally inviting people to be a part of our community. We want to "create space" for friends, family, and co-workers to hear about Jesus and be a part of community. At one time or another someone in our life invited us to church, a small group, a sports game, a cook out, or something that they were doing. It was their that God started working in our hearts through a simple invite.

.: Missional - We want to express God's Glory and build God's Kingdom. We want to be a church that has a reputation in our city for servanthood.

.: Community - We want to grow in our relationship with God as we grow in our relationship with others. We want to make sure no one stands alone, no one celebrates alone, no one grows alone, no one struggles alone... the list could just keep going.

Ok. For all of you who are tuning in this just a taste of the vision of Existence. If you have more questions about what it means to be a Inclusive. Missional. Community send an e-mail my way or Josh's way. You can reach Josh at jhexistence@gmail.com

Also, if you want to get an even better since of what the vision statement of Existence means to us visit the message section on our website (www.existencechurch.com/messages) and listen to Josh's message on Mark 2, the story of Levi.

I love this symbol. It has not, to my knowledge ever been made the symbol of a cause or religion. It is so beautiful I have often wondered why. I have also wondered why my fascination with this beautiful mark that simply signifies et cetera, all that other stuff. Except that I am an amateur calligrapher and have been since I was 12. That would probably explain loving the beauty of it, but there's more to my love than that.

The very meaning of sacred is to set apart, as in no longer common or profane but held in high regard. The ampersand is a bridge; its meaning is inclusion, not exclusion. It ties things together: Black & White; Red, White, & Blue; You & Me. There is nothing exclusionary about the ampersand. If it became a holy symbol it would be because there was a group of people that understood that God loves everyone, red & yellow, black & white, they are precious in his sight, and it’s not just the little children of the world, it’s the workers, & the aged, & the moms & the dads, it’s the bus boy in the restaurant & the owner, & the waitress, & the waiter, & the customer, the straight & the gay. Oops, did I say that? Yeah, I did.

There are those who would point out Sodom & Gomorrah to me and say, hey, God doesn’t like gays! And I would have to say to you that you haven’t studied this tale nearly well enough to even begin to preach to me if you take that as the message. I want to know a couple of things. Have you seen groups of gay men going around and raping other men? Have people come knocking on your door insisting you give them your guests to appease their sexual appetites? If that is the case, then, maybe God does need to come around with fire and brimstone. I’m glad that’s not my call, but, as a woman, I really detest the idea of rape, and I cannot believe it would be any easier on a man.

As far as I can tell forcing others into a sexual byplay is not what being gay is all about. I have had the honor of having been befriended by some very honorable men who happened also to be gay. They wouldn’t think of forcing a partner. So, where is your comparison, really? Does it even come close to holding? I don’t think so. And that only works for me if you take seriously the idea of stoning your children if they refuse to clean up their room, or stone a stranger for walking through your church when uninvited, now there’s a church that forgot the message for falling in love with the messenger. Go for it, sing Hallelujah, Glory to God, and when the stranger comes in your midst and doesn’t wipe his feet, (yes folks that is in the OT!) you stone him. That would make the headlines

To adopt the Ampersand as a holy symbol requires that we see ourselves as being “in the soup,” as it were, with everyone else. It requires that we drop the us and them perspective. It requires that we love God, and love our fellow man; even when our fellow man isn’t from our social club.

Another traditional Jamaican dish is ackee and saltfish. Ackee and saltfish is salt cod which is sautéed with boiled ackee. But what on earth is ackee? Ackee is actually a fruit which was introduced to Jamaica from West Africa and is now considered the national fruit of Jamaica with ackee and saltfish laying claim to the title of national dish.
Ackee is a bright orange fruit that when cooked looks and tastes a little like scrambled eggs and its slightly sweet taste combines perfectly with the saltfish so don’t be afraid to try it, its delicious.

Another popular dish in Jamaica is curry goat. Don’t ask for goat curry unless you want to get a funny look, it’s called curry goat in the Caribbean and despite what you may think, when cooked by an expert, it is incredibly tender and tasty.

To wash that down, how about an ice cold Red Stripe lager or perhaps you might like to sample Appleton Estate Jamaica Rum, dubbed as one of the finest rums in the world.

Couples Resorts offer beautiful all-inclusive resorts in Jamaica, with four stunning award winning resorts in fantastic locations: Couples Negril, Ocho Rios, Sans Souci and Swept Away.

interesting thing is how similar this is to rolling sections like this

I wonder if they have ever seen eachother skate?

What i think we can learn is to have an Obama moment in the skateboarding vs. rolling war and try to look past our differences and try to see where we can come together and share creatively toward a more inclusive future blah blah blah. Jackson totes ripped off dunkle...Kidding.

I'm still pushing for the idea laid out in the article, "The Impossibly Inclusive LARP," which should be appearing in a regional LARPing newsletter soon as well.  It's occurred to me through recent discussions that the idea of inclusiveness is not simply a philosophy a few players need to follow.  I believe that for large games to be truly inclusive and diverse to achieve this ideal model, there needs to be a culture change in how we, as players and GameMasters, approach large-scale games.

GM Responsibility: the Diverse Game

It is the nature of gamers that we each demand something entirely different from the games that we play.  There are general categories of playing styles, but each player is very unique in the way he approaches a story or any aspect of his character.  Players will often leave games because there is not enough combat, too much combat, too little socializing, or too much talking.

As a GM, if you give them rain, they'll want sun.  Given that, they'll complain about being burned.

It's a difficult job, as anyone who has run a large game knows.  Even more difficult is addressing the needs of players who seem isolated or uninvolved in the game.  GMs frequently take the approach that, "If you're not having fun, it's because you're not trying."

I will grant that this is occasionally true.  I do see players who never seem to be involved in the game itself, but they often seem content to show up merely for the social aspect.  For the sake of this discussion, I will ignore these players as their needs differ from the larger group I am talking about, the ones in what I've somewhat affectionately dubbed, "The Room of Bored People."

The solution to the Room from a GM standpoint is simple in theory and very difficult in practice: diversify.  This does require an active, willing staff, but I have personally witnessed its accomplishment, and the game at which that happened lasted for four long, very happy years before it collapsed beneath the weight of its own story (and the consequential huge amount of personal time the GM staff was putting into it).

The organization of that game was simple: players were divided into individual groups with similar interests, as they are in most large games, and the GM staff developed plots to help each one of those groups along.  Aside from the player involvement in this process (which I'll discuss later), the small-group approach worked wonderfully.  True, one group might have to wait a game or so for the GM staff to get back around to it, but they would ultimately be able to move their own plot along, which would all tie into the general forward motion of the game.

So diversity does work in this sense.  It could very well be possible without so strictly defined sets of groups, although those groups will form automatically.

A successful GM staff in a truly inclusive game can provide their players with full, real settings complete with NPCs available to kill, negotiate with, control, bargain with, or whatever any player could desire.  The staff also populates the world with stories just waiting for each type of group to run into: the sewers are crawling with deadly creatures that need to be eliminated, and there's a mystery as to why the mayor's office has suddenly stopped responding to anything outside, but in the meantime a rivalry between two banks is hurting the local economy.

Even if it's not all "hard" plot, a diverse game means there is something for everyone to engage in.

Information Dissemination

However, now that we've created this full world just waiting for PCs to come play in it, we need to be sure everyone knows where they can go.  This is a bridge between the GM staff and the players themselves that can be used to eliminate the Room of Bored People.

Step one: the information needs to be shoved out into the world.  Newspaper articles or other forms of reports work, but nothing beats the personal approach of a GM seeking out a group of players to deliver the relevant information.

Step two: the people with the information take the action of a responsible player by looking to see how many people they can manage to get involved in this budding plot from the start.  It's difficult to come into a plot in the middle (like walking in on the middle of a movie and trying to figure out what's happening), so this is the perfect opportunity for players to exercise the responsibility of including more people in the game itself.

Step three: the characters approach the problem with their own unique skill sets.  The great part of a large game is that a GM is never going to know exactly what the players are going to actually try; he'll be just as surprised as everyone else.

Step four: the world must respond to the players efforts.  This step is absolutely necessary to keep players engaged in the plot and make them feel that the game is worth their time.  If the plot rolls on past them without their really having to do anything, they'll enjoy watching the story, but they won't be as excited about the next plot that falls on their laps.  World response is the best way a GM can reward his players.

Again, this is the theory, which seems simple.  In practice, a GM staff for a game of more than ten players needs to repeat this process to generate multiple plots, as many as a dozen for a very large game (fifty players or more).

Step number four is also incredibly relevant to a diverse game in the aspect of mini or player-driven plots.  At LARP, we value our down-time actions; they're a chance to describe what our characters are doing in the weeks between games.  It also gives GMs the opportunity to respond to what their players are asking for directly.  In a diverse, inclusive game, each action receives some level of response, even if it's a one-line email saying that the task was accomplished.  In a very diverse game, the GMs will use these action reports to actually generate personalized plots.

Player Responsibility

Ultimately, the GM staff has only so much time and attention it can give to anything.  Inevitably, even with a game heavy with generated plot and downtime action response, players will find themselves not involved directly in any GM-driven plot.

And so we return once more to the concept of players taking responsibility for engaging and involving each other.  My greater ramblings on this matter are in the other article, but I'll summarize briefly how this affects this particular topic.

We, as players, can be very greedy.  We love to have the spotlight on us at least now and again, and we enjoy the games that revolve around our own characters.  However, in this natural self-involvement, we tend to get stuck in our own bubbles and not see the Room of Bored People.  Again, I can only restate that we should take it upon ourselves to look for the players who are sitting doing nothing and try to engage them, even if it means only exchanging a few heated words or generating a different plot than was originally intended (as in the "novel versus game" story-telling philosophy).

Cultural Revolution

We cannot stop ourselves from practicing a little greed; it is, in fact, why these personal stories drive large games so well and make the games so successful.  However, I've witnessed that most players are complacent to the fact that only a few players can ever be engaged at one time.

I would like to propose that this is not an acceptable practice we should be cultivating.  It is a natural part of the culture, but not an entirely healthy one.  Large games would be improved greatly by dispelling the myths of the "inclusive enough game" or the "lazy players."

Myth #1: If you are not having fun at the game, it is because you aren't trying hard enough.  For the most part, no one shows up continually to a game so they can spend the hours doing nothing.  The ones who seem to never be attempting anything are the ones who have been left out of the major motion of the game for too long or have not been able to find that "hook" that will get them engaged.  Very often, they simply are too far outside of the game to even know what they can try to accomplish or any happenings they might attempt to engage in.  It is other players' responsibility to share this knowledge.

Myth #2: There are enough plots in my game to make sure everyone has enough to do, so no one should be left out.  Again, this comes down to player responsibility: just because the plots exist, not everyone who could be engaged in them ever is.  To some degree, that's fine, but on the other hand, plots are usually carried by a core group of players who understand the story better than some of the "tag-alongs."  If we are interested in creating a really diverse, inclusive game, it is our duty as players to take the time to explain the details and allow others to get into the center of the story.

Myth #3: The most powerful characters in the game drive the game's direction.  This is both true and false.  It is true in the sense that the power players are just as greedy as the rest of us and love to splash around in the plot pool.  It is false, however, in the sense that a really responsible player will seek to share the center of the story with as many people as possible, regardless of power.

Myth #4: The GM staff is working hard to make this game as good as it can be; the players should live with that.  I'm glad there are GM staffs out there that are so dedicated.  However, if there are even a couple of players who are not enjoying the game, it has not branched out far enough.  It falls to the GMs and other players to seek to expand the game to meet everyone's needs.  If the GM staff is too occupied to begin that process, it simply must fall to the players.

Myth #5: Some people are just better at being involved than others.  The truth is that we all arrive at the game hoping to be involved in something.  We may not all be able to crunch numbers on a character sheet or hatch complicated political plots, but we do all of us have the ability to find a way to tell a story.  Regardless of actual story-telling ability, we do each have an approach to almost any circumstance that could happen in a game.  If a non-combat character walks into a room filled with the week's Big, Bad, and Uglies, he'll enjoy himself just trying to escape to find the right kind of help.

In summary, I would like to see an entire culture change in our perception of how a game should work.  We should not accept that there will simply be people left out because of the size or direction of the game or because of a player's skill level.  We need to believe that we can and should engage everyone who arrives to play.  We treat the game itself as a community of players; we should also be working to create a community of characters.

We need a culture change that rejects the notion that it is acceptable for anyone to be left out of a game's motion and embraces the idea of real inclusivity and story diversity.

When I first read the article about this plan, I noticed the references made to female and "ethnic minority" (am I the only person who does not use that term?) job candidates.

My ethical position is that no discrimination, other than on ability to do a job, should be justified.  I expect with the mentality of New Labour, most in the movement would have little ethical problem were there to be scenarios whereby a middle class non-white lady gets a job over a white working class male.  I could not justify supporting either based on their race or class alone (I could not imagine a scenario where they would be a factor at all).

But have New Labour not yet realised that this goes down very badly with those people that were once the bedrock of the Labour Movement.  Do they care?  I suspect that some, but not enough of influence, do.

Personally, and I think have said so on my blog previously, the 1997 to 2001 period should go down as a damaging period for those of us who believe in good race relations in Britain.  References to "race card" were made at that time on a daily basis and it was a period of incredible intolerance and if you did not agree with the Labour way forward, you could expect to be on the end of an accusation or two or be informed that you were not "inclusive".  The outcome of those years for too many people has been fear, disillusionment and disengagement from the mainstream.  I have always taken the view that the more politicians, and others, try to partition Britain into racial groups, there is the danger that some "groups" will feel left out.  That has arguably been the case with many white working class people.  I understand in some parts of the country white working class boys are the lowest achievers in their area (I do not remember Labour MPs sharing the concerns of Chris Woodhead when he raised them a number of years ago - if I am wrong, please let me know).

The Conservatives should go in much harder in attacking Labour failures on both race relations and in the outcomes for much of their traditional core vote.

I am pleased that I am part of an administration in Hounslow that loathes racism & discrimination and wishes to unite people as opposed to focus on difference.  I believe that this is the best way to persuade people to buy-in to the mainstream.

Everybody Matters!

The ABC evening news reported a survey released today by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. The result of the survey is that 70 percent say that their religion/belief system is not the only way to heaven. Here is the breakdown of the percentage of people who believe there are multiple ways to heaven:

83% mainline Protestants
79% Catholics
82% Jews
56% Muslims
57% Evangelicals

These numbers are not surprising since inclusiveness is in vogue and a claim to exclusive truth is viewed as arrogant and hateful. In addition, there is the understandable desire for most everyone to be okay - that only those in the league of Hitler would be kept from eternal life.  The problem for those who claim to be followers of Jesus is that He doesn't view it this way.  He emphatically states, "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but by Me!" (John 14:6).  When Jesus is stripped of these claims, the pseudo-believer ends up with a different Jesus and a different Gospel altogether.  

Is it arrogant and hateful to teach that Jesus is the only way to eternal life?  I do not believe so.  Let's assume for one moment that Jesus is the only way.  If that is true, and if I teach that you are okay to believe whatever you want to, would that be loving?  No, the only loving thing to do would be to teach Jesus as the only way.  As for arrogance, the belief in Jesus is anything but arrogant because the believer must admit that he NEEDS Jesus because he is not good enough on his own.

A question worth asking is, "Why is Jesus the only way?"  The answer is because He is the only one who was sinless and by death could pay for the sins of others.  Sin is our serious disease and Jesus is the solution. In love He offers eternal and abundant life to you - even now. "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son" (John 3:17-18).

Do you believe in Jesus as He really is or are you swimming with the popular current?

La sesión preparatoria del Senado será el miércoles, a las 11, de acuerdo a la convocatoria que lanzó formalmente el vicegobernador de la provincia, José Lauritto.

Actualmente, la vicepresidencia primera está ocupada por Raúl Taleb, y la segunda por el único radical que logró ingresar al Senado, Rubén Ruiz. El bloque se reúne los martes y se espera que en esa oportunidad se tomen las decisiones finales, ya que los conflictos que atravesaron el país pusieron en un segundo plano esa discusión que podría darse esta semana, aunque se habrán descartado los cambios.

El llamado se enmarca en lo establecido por la Constitución provincial, que en su artículo 62 determina que la cámara alta, en cada período ordinario, el nuevo comenzará el próximo 1º de Julio, “se nombrará un vicepresidente primero y un vicepresidente segundo, los cuales entrarán a desempeñar el cargo, por su orden, en defecto del presidente”.

El artículo en cuestión indica también que “las autoridades elegidas durarán en sus funciones hasta la iniciación del período ordinario siguiente”. Cabe agregar que los alcances de la sesión preparatoria se encuentran dentro del artículo 2 del Reglamento del Cuerpo. Ahí se precisa que “dentro de los diez días anteriores al de la iniciación del Período Ordinario de Sesiones, inclusive, deberá reunirse el Cuerpo en sesión preparatoria a los efectos de integrar la Mesa Directiva” (RN)

Maddie's coach is awesome.  She said if all Maddie wants to do is sit on the bench, that's fine with her. 

So Maddie will go to all of the Tuesday games to cheer on the girls on her team.  She will do the lap around the field before the game begins and the high fives with the other team when the game is over.

I'm so happy that this has worked itself out.  The coaches and girls couldnt be more welcoming and willing to adapt.  : ) 

http://mcdj.wordpress.com/2008/05/26/play-ball-2/

http://mcdj.wordpress.com/2008/05/17/play-ball-1/

Ah Babi, eu como 10 bombons de chocolate. E se não estou me sentindo tão sozinha assim também.

This is a message presented at the Crystal Cathedral, Garden Grove, CA.

Whatever your religious persuasion, please lay it aside and listen!

I have a good friend who talks a lot about the value of participating in sports, and I figured my kids aren't getting any younger, so during Easter Break I took all the kids up to the Township Hall with the intention of signing Cassidy up for softball and Andrew up for t-ball. 

The receptionist saw the gaggle of children with me and asked how many I was signing up.  "One boy and one girl."  Maddie raised her hand and started with "Me!  Me!  Me!"

She's never played ball or any organized sport outside of gym class at school.  I'd just finished with the Creative Dramatics class BS.  I really didn't want to sign her up!

But agreeing to sign her up was better than arguing with her in the Township Hall.  What could I say anyways that would be a good enough reason to deny her?  "Sorry, your mom is too lazy."

So I signed her up along with Andrew and Cassidy, just to shut her up, never really fully intending that she would actually be on a team.  I sign her up and wait for the coach to call and tell me what team she's assigned to.  Then I could have her drop out if need be.

I dread those first contact phone calls.  The ones where I have to try to explain Maddie over the phone.  She sounds so complicated and the wording is always so negative.  "Well she doesn't speak, and she can't really run or jump, and I'm not a sport-y person, so I don't know what Maddie's playing ball would actually look like."  Blah!

And over the phone, I can't tell what the person's reaction is, so I just keep talking and talking excessively.  Eventually I pause to breathe and the coach gets a word in.

She does offer up that there were a lot of girls that signed up for that age range, so some had to be bumped up to her league (minors - where the kids pitch themselves) from coach-pitch.  The coach says that her main goal is to teach the skills, not to win.  That it's most important for the kids to learn to protect themselves against being hurt by the ball.  (( tbh- I don't know how realistic that is for Maddie. )) She has suggestions for how we can make this work for Maddie. 

We end the phone call with my agreeing to call the Township Hall and ask that Maddie be switched to a coach-pitch team.  I thank her for being receptive and welcoming to Maddie. 

A minute later, she leaves me a voicemail, asking me to still bring Maddie to the first practice, so she can meet her and maybe it would work out to have her on this team. 

I did not expect that.  Who does that?  This woman had a guarunteed out, a way to NOT have my child on her team, and she didn't take it?  I shouldn't anticipate that people won't want her/me/us, but truth be told they usually don't!

Doug took all the kids to Maddie's first practice on Friday evening.  Right away, Maddie knew a girl there.  During the practice, Maddie participated in all of the different stations, catching and throwing, hitting the ball.  All the other girls were great with her, very encouraging. 

Cassidy practiced with the team too.  She did a great job too.  Drew and Jay kicked soccer balls around the field. 

So what to do? 

1. Leave her on this team, with a great coach who "gets it", but she won't be as able to participate in the games that fully.
2. Move her to a coach-pitch team, not knowing what the coach will be like and if he/she will be accepting of Maddie, but knowing she could have assistance with batting and an extra person in the outfield with her.
3. Move her to coach-pitch, same team as Cassidy.

 Seriously, what should I do?  Somebody tell me because this was not covered in my "how to parent" handbook.