ZG - gayle.berryhill@gmail.com > 05/10/2019 - 22:32

Solapas principales

<br> On June 3rd and 4th Julie-Mae Stanley, President of National Association of Women Business Owners - Central Jersey (NAWBO - Central Jersey), met with key Congresspersons and White House staff to discuss issues pertinent to women in business. Stanley and new member to NAWBO, Adanna Davis, met with White House Council on Women and girls and SBA Deputy Director, Hallie Schneir, as well as, Members of Congress: Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-NC), Rep. Gwen Graham (D-FL), Rep. David Joyce (R-OH), and Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-IN) to discuss small business growth and how policies could be leveraged to help accommodate the needs of women in business. "What many people don’t realize is that if all women owned businesses were merged globally, we’d be the 5th largest global economy," says Stanley. "That’s how significant our contribution to the world is right at this moment. Stanley is not only the Central Jersey president of NAWBO, but also the CEO of Global Ambicion Group, a strategic business and consulting company that helps businesses and individuals to expand their brands and explore international opportunities. Her focus is to help corporate, government and library entities with their global initiatives. "It was a real eye-opener for me," says Stanley. "I’m grateful to be a part of something so momentous at this time. It was an exhilarating and inspiring experience that left us both awe. Truly educational and invigorating - I encourage ambitious business owners to get involved in public policy and be a part of the decision making process. Whether we make a decision or not, a decision is being made for us, so why not join the conversation? NAWBO opens the door, are you ready to step in?<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> This is where the sympathizer begins to strain. For many of our ancestors, these differences - http://www.houzz.com/?search=differences were enough to justify animosity and a declaration of war against all who are different, on that sole quality. It would take a person to have either well-developed logic skills or a thorough history of experience to feel deeply for the creature. What if it was a chicken, or a cow, or a horse, or a dog, who was in suffering - https://www.b2bmarketing.net/search/gss/suffering ? How would you feel if you came across a coyote that was stuck in a bear trap? Perhaps you, dear reader, are knowledgeable in outdoorsman skills, and you know that the coyote will chew off its leg, only to die of starvation because of the inability to hunt. Maybe you don't just hear the coyote calling its brethren for help that they can't offer, but you can feel the soft rumble of its whimpering voice trace its way to your feet as you stand before it. In every one of these instances, we see the moral framework of an individual at work. This is ethics, a decision of right and wrong.<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> Whenever we hear great politicians speak to us about "family morals," etc., they are covertly talking about promoting monogamous, heterosexual, sexist relationships. We see the moral framework of the sympathizer and the sufferer in these hypothetical scenarios. I have answered the how and why people sympathize with each other. When one suffers, it is a dreadful emotion, and when seeing another suffer, it triggers that memory, and creates sympathy. It is rather simple. But, I have also applied this sense of sympathy to all living creatures in these scenarios. Why do we offer sympathy and justice to our fellow men and women? On what grounds, on what foundation, https://ellisjshaf.blog.wox.cc/ - http://newsjunkie3.manifo.com/ on what earthly understanding do we promote peace, truth, fairness, and nobility of character? Quite simply, because we ourselves have suffered. So, too, animals suffer. And when an animal suffers, it is not at all unlike our own suffering. In fact, you could potentially remove all the parts of a man that make him look human.<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> Cut off his flesh, or go in the opposite direction, and dress him as an animal, and he will still suffer. This was a lesson that our forefathers learned centuries ago, when they discovered that skin color alone was not enough to forsake someone to a class of insufferable criminals. We are making a step that is not less grand today. As progressive reformers, we are realizing that all of our fellow creatures on this planet can suffer like any man. For this reason alone, we offer them our sympathy, our hope, and a sense of justice that always seems fleeting. If it is wrong to condemn a skin color, where is the justice in condemning an organism with four legs, wings, or fins? If you scream injustice at discrimination of race, why are you saying nothing at the discrimination of species? Maybe there was a day in your life that you were curious about American history. In looking through the pages that described slaves being beaten and raped, you cried. It is a commonly accepted fact that animals in factory farms are being beaten and murdered -- but I can find nothing, except these hypocrites.<br>