« September 2006 | Main | November 2006 »
October 26, 2006
New Jersey Grants Naming Rights to Public (and a justice to be named later)
During the debate over the proposed (now enacted) Georgia constitutional amendment stating that marriage was the union of a man and a woman, critics of the proposal said that it was not necessary, since there was already a law on the books banning same-sex marriage. The New Jersey Supreme Court today put the lie to that line of reasoning. To some judges, it doesn't matter what laws are already in effect; they want to set the legislative calendar.
Saying times have changed, New Jersey's highest court on Wednesday guaranteed gay couples the same rights as married heterosexuals but left it to state lawmakers to decide if such unions can be called marriage."Times and attitudes have changed," the New Jersey Supreme Court said in a nuance 90-page ruling that was neither a clear victory nor a defeat for gay marriage, which is currently legal in the United States only in Massachusetts.
"Despite the rich diversity of this state, the tolerance and goodness of its people, and the many recent advances made by gays and lesbians toward achieving social acceptance and equality under the law, the court cannot find that the right to same-sex marriage is a fundamental right under our constitution," the ruling said.
Stating that gay couples must have the same rights as other couples, the court said gay advocates must now "appeal to their fellow citizens whose voices are heard through their popularly elected representatives."
With that in mind, the court gave the legislature six months to either amend the state's marriage statutes to include gay people, or write a new law in which same-sex couples "would enjoy the rights of civil marriage."
New Jersey's marriage statutes define marriage as being between a man and a woman.
The ruling leaves state lawmakers with two options -- allow gays to marry in the same way as others, or develop a parallel system of unions for same-sex couples. That second option would leave New Jersey with civil unions akin to those in Vermont.
While it sounds magnanimous for the court to leave it to the legislature, they still set a requirement for what the legislature must do. While they say that the appeal must be made to "their fellow citizens whose voices are heard through their popularly elected representatives", they then go on to direct the legislature what to do, which is not at all a case of popular representation. All the people are left with are naming rights, as Hugh Hewitt notes. What a case of double-speak!
I say again, the Left has raised the bar, changed the playing field, made new rules, whatever cliche you want to use. Constitutional amendments are the only tool left to wield for those who oppose this, so it should come as no surprise when it is wielded. And no complaints, either. Either use the legislature and the courts as they were intended, or get ready to be met on the field of your choosing.
Posted by Doug at 02:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
German Homeschoolers Update
In the case of homeschoolers in Germany, previously covered here and here, the kids are now being forcibly carted off to public school.
A Nazi-era law requiring all children to attend public school, to avoid "the emergence of parallel societies based on separate philosophical convictions" that could be taught by parents at home, apparently is triggering a Nazi-like response from police.The word comes from Netzwerk Bildungsfreiheit, or Network for Freedom in Education, which confirmed that children in a family in Bissingen, in the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg, have been forcibly hauled to a public school.
"On Friday 20 October 2006 at around 7:30 a.m. the children of a home educating family ... were brought under duress to school by police," the organization, which describes itself as politically and religiously neutral, confirmed.
A separate weblog in the United States noted the same tragedy.
Homeschoolblogger.com noted that the "three children were picked up by the police and escorted to school in Baden-Wurttemberg, with the 'promise' that it would happen again this week."
The Network for Freedom in Education, through spokesman Joerg Grosseluemern, said the Remeike family has been "home educating their children since the start of the school year, something which is legal in practically the whole of the (European Union)."
Posted by Doug at 10:15 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 25, 2006
The View From a Sergeant
James Taranto's "Best of the Web Today" today has an e-mail from a soldier in Iraq. With his experience with what's going on with the Army, the culture and the changing circumstances, his suggestion is that the correct policy needs to be something between "stay the course" and "cut and run". It seems to me to be a very insightful look at reality there. Some of his suggestions are, I'll admit, tough to swallow if indeed they'd be necessary. Definitely worth the read (and as always, getting the daily e-mail of this column is recommended). He concludes:
James, there's a lot more to this than I've written here. The short of it is, the situation is salvageable, but not with "stay the course" and certainly not with cut and run. However, the commitment required to save it is something I doubt the American public is willing to swallow. I just don't see the current administration with the political capital remaining in order to properly motivate and convince the American public (or the West in general) of the necessity of these actions.At the same time, failure in Iraq would be worse than a dozen Somalias, and would render us as impotent and emasculated as we were in the days after Vietnam. There is a global cultural-ideological struggle being waged, and abdication from Iraq is tantamount to concession.
Later, Taranto quotes Nancy Pelosi, who'd most likely be Speaker of the House after a majority Democrat win.
"But you don't think that the terrorists have moved into Iraq now?" Stahl continues."They have," Pelosi agrees. "The jihadists in Iraq. But that doesn't mean we stay there. They'll stay there as long as we're there."
She seems to think (or is trying to sell us on the idea) that the moment we leave, all will be well with the world and the jihadists will become model citizens or at least stop attacking American interests. As the sergeant tells us (gotta read the whole thing), there's more going on than just terrorism, and it's not easily dealt with, and especially not dealt with by running away.
Posted by Doug at 01:54 PM | Comments (15) | TrackBack
Scott Adams, a Cartoonist and a Speech Therapist
Eighteen months ago, Scott Adams, the Dilbert cartoonist, lost his voice to what he describes as an "exotic" disease; Spasmodic Dysphonia. Here's how he describes it:
Essentially a part of the brain that controls speech just shuts down in some people, usually after you strain your voice during a bout with allergies (in my case) or some other sort of normal laryngitis. It happens to people in my age bracket.I asked my doctor – a specialist for this condition – how many people have ever gotten better. Answer: zero.
Scott decided that he wasn't going to take this lying down and started working on figuring out a way to cure himself, or at least make himself better as much as possible. His post, entitled "Good News Day", of how he did this and how successful he has been is really an amazing read. Imagine figuring out how to reprogram your brain.
Posted by Doug at 12:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 24, 2006
Missouri's Cloning Amendment
Via Redstate.com comes exposure of the tactics of those who want to move forward with human cloning and embryonic stem cell research with taxpayer money. They can't get the citizenry to accept it at face value, so they're engaging in classic Orwellian misdirection.
The proposed Missouri constitutional amendment 2 says, for example, that it will prevent human cloning. However, as Missourians Against Human Cloning notes in their explanation of the language of the amendment, what it says on the ballot is quite different from what the amendment actually says. In fact, the amendment allows for “Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer", which is the textbook definition of human cloning. The "human cloning" that is banned, as per the amendment, is just the implantation of the results of that transfer into a human womb. If it stays outside, it ain't a clone, so they say. But the ballot language doesn't define its terms, so they hope to pull one over on Missourians by saying the right words, but not meaning what most folks think they mean.
This is just bullet point 1 in a list that also includes a blank check to the biotech industry. The Redstate post has links to lots of good information about this situation. It doesn't say much for their cause at all that they have to resort this these sorts of underhanded tactics to get their way.
Why do I care about what happens in Missouri, if I'm in Georgia? Because if this deception works there, it will be exported, make no mistake.
UPDATE: Scott Ott at ScrappleFace hits the nail on the head, with his own video production of "Michael J. Embryo", and some biting wit that drives the point home.
Posted by Doug at 09:15 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
October 23, 2006
Bullet-proof Books
Now here's an idea for all those previous-edition schoolbooks.
With school shootings a growing concern across the country, a candidate for state superintendent of schools in Oklahoma is running on a platform of defense.His idea? Storing old textbooks beneath the desks of all public school children for use as shields from gunfire.
In a videotaped experiment, Bill Crozier even went so far as to test various books and various firearms.
Crozier, a Union City Republican challenging incumbent Democrat Sandy Garrett, said he would put thick used textbooks under every desk for students to use in self-defense.
Crozier's experiment began with shots fired at a calculus textbook from an AK-47 Russian-style assault rifle. The shot penetrated two textbooks at once. Shots from handguns were generally stopped by thick books.
And people suggest that kids who get homeschooled aren't getting socialized. Well, they're wrong, but even if they were right, they're also not getting shot at.
Posted by Doug at 12:36 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
October 20, 2006
Abdul Rahman Still a Marked Man
Abdul Rahman is a convert to Christianity from Islam, and escaped the death penalty in Afghanistan (in what was mostly a face-saving maneuver by the courts there). See previous SCO coverage of this here and here. Having moved to Italy, he's gone, but not forgotten.
The kidnappers of an Italian journalist in Afghanistan have offered to free him in exchange for a Christian convert who fled the country, an aid agency says.Photojournalist Gabriele Torsello was seized last week while travelling on a bus in southern Afghanistan.
The kidnappers will free Mr Torsello, a Muslim convert, if Abdul Rahman returns from Italy where he was granted asylum earlier this year, the aid agency says.
Mr Rahman had escaped a possible death sentence for becoming a Christian.
He had been charged with rejecting Islam and released this March after being deemed mentally unfit to stand trial on a charge of apostasy.
(Hat tip: Michelle Malkin)
Rahman still needs our support and our prayers.
Posted by Doug at 02:36 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
NBC Responds to Madonna Crucifix Display
Looks like NBC is responding to pressure not to show the singer Madonna up on a mirrored cross during the upcoming televising of her concert.
After weeks of controversy, NBC has decided not to show pop star Madonna suspended from a giant cross and wearing a crown of thorns when the network airs a special of her "Confessions" tour, a source close to the organization of the event said on Thursday.The source spoke after NBC announced it had revised the two-hour concert special, which airs November 22, but did not elaborate on what changes would be made.
The source said the portion of the "Live to Tell" song in which Madonna sings suspended from a giant cross and wearing a crown of thorns will not be shown in the broadcast. Instead, cameras will cut to other shots or images while Madonna is on the cross. She steps away from the cross to finish the song.
Whether this means that NBC is developing something of a spine, or if this is purely a financial decision (some affiliates "expressed uneasiness" about carrying the special) is yet to be seen. However, couple this with the addition of a religiously toned-down version of the Christian-values "Veggie Tales" for Saturday mornings by NBC, and the network seems to be moving back somewhat from the general media position that it's OK to offend Christians. Baby steps, but in the right direction.
Posted by Doug at 02:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 18, 2006
Only 68 Days Until Christmas!
I was in J C Penny this evening, and while browsing around I noticed that the background music sounded familiar. For a minute I thought that it was some song that had a melodic phrase similar to a very popular piece of music; just an interesting coincidence. But as I listened to see if the melody changed, I realized that what I was listening to was the more popular tune.
"Angels We Have Heard On High".
I said to the guy at the register, "Christmas music? Already?" He gave a light-hearted roll of the eyes and said, "Tell me about it." I love Christmas music, don't get me wrong (my father is a non-repentant Christmas-aholic), but this does seem a little early.
So you know what that means, right? When you start hearing Christmas carols played in the stores, it's almost...
Right. Halloween.
Posted by Doug at 10:15 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
October 13, 2006
GOP Will Expel, Not Censure, Bob Ney
From the AP regarding the Abramoff scandal:
House Republican leaders vowed Friday to expel convicted Rep. Bob Ney "as our first order of business" after the elections unless he resigns.
Not censure, not wrist slap, not bloviate; expel. Again, as with Foley, this is the right thing to do even if it mean losing control of the House of Representatives.
Posted by Doug at 12:39 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
October 12, 2006
Codependency on the World Stage
Chuck Asay gives us "A Brief History of North Korea's Weapons of Mass Destruction Program".
Giving foreign aid to countries because we're afraid of what they'll do with a nuke doesn't curtail proliferation, it promotes it. Rogue states get what they need to prop up the dictator, and thus the lives of its citizens are made to be anything from miserable to fatal for the coming years. In the meantime, said rogue state still continues to work on obtaining nukes. There's never any penalty to be paid, other than a nasty-gram from the UN, so there's no real reason to live up to the agreement.
This is textbook codependency. We're enabling the very actions we're hoping to prevent. And when we try to cut off the free ride, others accuse us of being cold-hearted. The world is acting like the wife of an alcoholic man. And neither situation is healthy for the parties involved.
Posted by Doug at 05:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 11, 2006
The Source of the Next Jihad
Look to the prisons to find out where our next terror cell may be created.
The spread of an especially virulent form of Islam within American prisons is obvious to those of us who have spent time in these prisons. It’s the rest of American society that is in denial. Now, thanks to a new study, ignorance is no longer an option.The study, titled “Out of the Shadows,” concluded that “the U.S. . . . is at risk of facing the sort of homegrown terrorism currently plaguing other countries.” The source of that risk, according to researchers from George Washington University and the University of Virginia, is “[America’s] large prison population.”
“Radicalized prisoners” within this population “are a potential pool of recruits by terrorist groups,” the study says. The sources of radicalization are incarcerated Islamic extremists and outside organizations that support them. The report notes that the absence of “monitoring by authoritative Islamic chaplains” permits “materials that advocate violence [to infiltrate] the prison system undetected.”
Some of this material is provided by known al-Qaeda affiliates. It “[urges Muslim prisoners] to wage war against non-Muslims who have not submitted to Islamic rule.” As a former employee of a radical Islamist group who is now a Christian told a Senate committee, “I know of only a few instances in which prisons rejected the literature we attempted to distribute—and it was never because of the literature’s radicalism.”
Would it surprise you to know that a program that's been successful in curbing this radical form of religious zealotry is under attack? The Left in this country just can't abide success when Christianity's involved. And Chuck Colson's Prison Fellowship is feeling the heat, although it may be the rest of us feeling it if they are shut out from the countries prisons.
The study recommends the creation of a federal commission to “investigate this issue in depth.” It says that an “objective risk assessment” is “urgently needed” so that “officials [can] address this issue now, rather than [managing] a crisis later.”I agree wholeheartedly, but let’s get on with this. We already know what the study has concluded. I’ve been telling “BreakPoint” listeners and readers and Prison Fellowship supporters about this for years. Now we have more than anecdotal evidence. We have a study from two prestigious universities on our side.
Still, I can’t help but note an irony here: The largely unimpeded spread of radical Islam through our prisons coincides with increased opposition to the one really successful antidote—that is, the presence of Christianity.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State are so concerned about the spread of Christianity, and apparently not so concerned about the breeding of new terrorists, that they're suing Prison Fellowship in Iowa. They're trying to remove a successful program that is 60% funded by private money. Fortunately, PF has a number of folks in its corner, including the Attorneys General from 9 other states who are more concerned with our safety than they are with a misreading of the First Amendment (essentially the elevation of a phrase in a private letter to that of constitutional law).
Here's to PF's success. It may well be a matter of national security.
Posted by Doug at 03:15 PM | Comments (9) | TrackBack
October 09, 2006
Tom Lehrer and Political Satire
As part of a chemistry "assignment", one of the teachers for our homeschooling "co-op" gave her kids the URL to an old Tom Lehrer song where he sings many of the elements to the tune of "Modern Major General". In doing that, we looked up some information on Lehrer, who's songs I'd heard here and there as a kid. Funny stuff.
Lehrer was quite the Harvard liberal. On Wikipedia, it says he quipped that political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973. I just wonder if good ol' Tom had anything to say when Yassar Arafat won it. Just wondering.
Posted by Doug at 04:36 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
October 05, 2006
Hastert Should Resign
There are now allegations that Dennis Hastert's office knew about the emails from Representative Foley to pages, perhaps as early as three years ago. Nonetheless, certain members of the Republican leadership, and Hastert himself, resist calls for Hastert's resignation.
For my own part, it seems like there is enough evidence to indicate that Hastert, and others in the House, knew about the allegations, or should have known. If it becomes clear that they did have actual knowledge, and did nothing, then they ought to not only be removed from leadership, but removed from the House altogether.
However, the analysis does not end with actual knowledge. Regardless of Hastert's actual knowledge, there is now enough evidence to indicate that he should have known about the emails. It seems clear that a number of people in the House knew about Foley. It appears to not have been a secret. Consider if the House were a school district, or a corporation for that matter, and the school district or corporation had such information within it but did not have a system in place to follow up on this information and get it in the right hands. Such a school district or corporation would be subject to huge liability.
The House, however, apparently has no such system for properly dealing with this type of information. How do we know that? Because Dennis Hastert himself admits, by his denial of actual knowledge, that there is no system in the US House of Representatives to get this type of information to him. There is, in short, no system to protect these pages. Remember a goodly number of these pages are minors--children, albeit older children. Hastert, as the administrative as well as political leader of the House, has a duty to protect these children that is the same as any school principal. He has clearly, by his own admission, failed to so protect them. That is reason enough for Hastert to resign immediately, regardless of his actual knowledge.
Posted by Mark at 07:19 AM | Comments (3)
October 04, 2006
A Pox on Both Their Houses, Yes, But Look Closer, Too
So says Benjamin Shapiro.
On what moral basis do Democrats condemn Foley? They have no basis for moral outrage, since they have championed the destruction of traditional morality for decades. Instead, they condemn Foley and the Republicans for hypocrisy. Foley, when he wasn't spending his time chasing teenage boys, pushed for legislation to crack down on child pornography. House Republicans, when they weren't busy ignoring Foley's scummy behavior, pushed for legislation to uphold traditional values. The big sin here, according to the social left, is that Foley and the Republicans tried to bolster antiquated sexual mores while simultaneously bucking them in personal life. Were Mark Foley a liberal Democrat from San Francisco, liberals would be hard-pressed to spot a problem with his behavior.But Republicans should not have been. The Republican Party is the party supposedly dedicated to those antiquated value systems that made this country great. It should not have been difficult for Republicans to identify the problems with Foley's behavior: pedophilia, exploitation, and yes, homosexuality. And yet, because the Republican Party has become infected with either the unchecked will to wield power or the milquetoast tolerance of the social left, House Republicans did nothing. Shame on them.
Shapiro goes down the list of Democrats that the Left either made excuses for or simply slapped on the wrist--Studds, Clinton--and also adds Pelosi, who opposes parental consent laws regarding underage abortions. While moral outrage is well-placed on Foley's head, I find Shapiro's contention that Democrats are not taking that tack, rather using the "hypocrite" bludgeon.
News flash: Human beings are flawed and hypocritical. Politicians, with all the power and money flowing around them, will be put in more situations than the average person that will tempt them to abandon their principals. This is not news.
What is, or should be, news is how each political party deals with its problems. Regardless of possible hushing in the past, Foley did the right thing once the truth came out. One wishes that this would have been caught and dealt with earlier, but Foley is gone. Not censured, not reprimanded; gone.
Here's another example: Want to know why you've never heard of "Speaker of the House Bob Livingston"? Because he did the right thing.
In a speech on the House floor during the impeachment of Bill Clinton, he first called on Clinton to resign.
But to the president, I would say, sir you have done great damage to this nation over this past year and while your defenders are contending that further impeachment proceedings would only protract and exacerbate the damage to this country, I say that you have the power to terminate that damage and heal the wounds that you have created.You sir, may resign your post.
I listened to this speech live on the radio. During this portion of the speech, Democrats could be heard yelling out, "You resign!". The clamor got louder and louder, and peaked while Livingston spoke that last line. But then, from his already-prepared speech, he continued speaking and set the example.
I can only challenge you in such fashion that I am willing to heed my own words. To my colleagues, my friends and most especially my wife and family, I have hurt you all deeply and I beg your forgiveness.I was prepared to lead our narrow majority as speaker, and I believe I had it in me to do a fine job. But I cannot do that job or be the kind of leader that I would like to be under current circumstances.
So I must set the example that I hope President Clinton will follow. I will not stand for speaker of the House on January 6th, but rather I shall remain as a backbencher in this Congress that I so dearly love for approximately six months into the 106th Congress, whereupon I shall vacate my seat and ask my governor to call a special election to take my place.
All of a sudden, the Democrats realized they'd been put to shame by a man willing to lead by actions, not just words. Now, a cry of "No, no!" went up from the House. But whether this was Republicans, shamed Democrats, or both, Livingston's mind had already been made up. This Republican led by example, ending his own political career on the cusp of being chosen for one of the highest posts in the land. He wasn't censured, he was gone.
Yes there's hypocrisy, on both sides. Yes there are cover-ups, on both sides. Yes, there are actions to be condemned, on both sides. But overall, I believe Republicans have done the right thing more often and at higher costs. And as Shapiro notes, in the Republican party, even the hypocrites can be found to be pushing traditional values, while many true-blue Democrats are trying to make it easier for sexual predators to cover up their statutory rape of 14-year-olds.
Posted by Doug at 02:40 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
Limbo Cancelled
No, not the dance, the place. (Apologies to Catholic readers, but I just couldn't pass up that headline for a little chuckle.)
Of course, the issue of the eternal destination of children who are unbaptized or who are younger than some age of consent has always been a thorny theological issue in the Christian church in general. While the article's headline suggests that the Pope may be making this ruling based on making outreach in Muslim countries easier, it also notes that he's not ever been convinced of its existence. So I really don't think this is a marketing ploy.
Posted by Doug at 01:31 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Affecting the Culture
What would your church do to make an impact on our culture, if it had $100,000 at its disposal? One Baptist church decided to make a movie; a high-quality movie with a good message that is competing favorably against Hollywood's offerings.
It was made by a church on a donated budget of $100,000 with volunteer actors, but instead of a low-budget castoff, "Facing the Giants" held its own against Hollywood's big boys in its opening weekend, grossing $1.4 million on only 441 screens.Officials say the production, by Sherwood Baptist Church in Albany, Ga., was released by Samuel Goldwyn Films and ranked No. 12 for all films over its first weekend, even though other films had up to eight times as many screens. Its per-screen average of $3,149 was fourth among the top 10 grossing weekend films.
"I think this sends a clear message to Hollywood that there is an audience who does want to see a positive, uplifting film that promotes faith and family values," said Michael Catt, the senior pastor at Sherwood Baptist and executive producer for the project.
"Hopefully, this will open the door for more organizations to bring other quality-content projects to the big screen," he said.
With the lower cost of entry now that movie production has gone digital, this sort of project is now possible.
I can imagine that some might say that this was money that could have been better spent on other projects. But I'd say that a lot of those projects are being done by other churches. I'm happy to see that, just as with individuals, different church bodies have different gifts, and they should be free to use them as God directs (no pun intended).
Besides, based on the box office receipts, this movie could not only encourage Christians and bring the good news to non-Christians, it will likely bring in more money to be used on more conventional projects.
Proceeds are to be used for a 40-acre youth recreational park planned by Sherwood Baptist in Albany, officials said.
Let's celebrate the unconventional, and ask God for more of it.
Posted by Doug at 01:00 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
October 02, 2006
For the Record
Regardless of allegations that the timing is suspect, and even if others have gotten away with worse in the past, the ejection of Foley by Republicans is the right thing to do. Now. Even if it means losing the House of Representatives.
Posted by Doug at 01:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Our Ugly Age
Frederica Mathewes-Green has an interesting observation about the lack of aesthetical sense in our age. Her point goes beyond the skin deep. The ugliness that is reflected in our media reflects a more fundamental ugliness. That her example is a children’s' movie is also not a coincidence. Much that is targeted at children, whether cartoons, clothes or toys (particularly dolls), is drawn intentionally as an absurd and gross caricature. "Life," this predominant theme seems to say, "is not to be taken seriously, and it is ugly in any event. Accordingly, let us seek out new and grotesque frontiers to avoid dealing with our reality." It's not pretty aesthetically nor morally.
Well, it doesn’t solve the underlying ugliness of our age (particularly our Culture of Death) to simply say, “Let’s only buy that which is beautiful.” Nonetheless, it would not hurt to give it a try. This could particularly be true in the realm of children. We parents fund this ugly stuff. We simply ought to stop. If you think the stuff your kids want is yucky--don't buy it. Don't fund this junk. It's ok to be culturally chauvinistic with respect to the goods you buy for your kids. You do not have to say, "well that's not for me but if that's what's cool with the kids . . ." We parents all need to show a little spine. We run our kids lives, not these purveyors of crap. Let's put them out of business. In doing so, perhaps we will be taking a small step forward on other cultural issues.
Update: Subscribers to the Mars Hill Audio Journal know that the subject of beauty comes up with some frequency in that publication. Ken Myers has a nice essay that delves into this subject a bit and ties the idea of beauty into the larger theme of the imago Dei. (Note that this is also a fundraising letter.)
Posted by Mark at 12:52 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack