In Defense Of Matchy-Matchy Printed Outfits (They Are Cool. Trust Us.)

Thanks to the awesomeness of style stars like Solange Knowles and Jenna Lyons, we’ve been taught the wondrous ways of mixing prints. But what about the equally tricky, yet thrilling, matchy-matchy trend? Wearing one print from head-to-toe may seem like a fashion no-no, but we’re here to tell you that you can and should do it.

While coordinated separates might have had their heyday back in the ’60s, the head-turning style is making a strong comeback. We’ve seen matchy-matchy outfits on the runway, on the streets and in our dreams, er, Pinterest boards. Basically it’s a trend worth revisiting and you’re almost guaranteed to be the coolest girl in the room if you do.

Plus, there are no rules when it comes to wearing matching separates. But feel free to break up the prints by wearing a solid-colored top underneath a matching blazer and bottoms, and make sure your accessories are simple so they don’t compete with the print.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Thank You Bobby Jindal!

In a New York Times op-ed (April 23), Louisiana Governor and former GOP wonder-boy Bobby Jindal did his best, full-throated Tom Petty imitation. “I won’t back down,” Jindal effectively told the nation. Not when it comes to facilitating discrimination against gay people, no, he won’t back down.

The proximate cause of Jindal’s rant was the capitulation he sees in Indiana and Arkansas to the “bullying” by an unholy alliance of “left-wing activists” and “large corporations.” They forced (apparently spineless) politicians to water down “religious freedom” bills in both states, and Jindal wanted us all to know that he will stand firm against what he called “radical liberals” – though I have no idea what that phrase means.

At one level, Jindal’s essay is almost bizarre – a sloppy combination of faulty reasoning, self-promotion and aggrieved whining. But Jindal has also inadvertently clarified what’s really at stake in this recent flare-up over “religious freedom.” The problem is only secondarily about homophobia, though that’s what most people have focused on. The primary problem here is what people like Jindal believe constitutes “religious freedom” in the first place.

In a country where the freedom of religious worship is a bedrock principle, where a sizeable majority of citizens believe in personal angels, and where the Bible is routinely cited by major politicians to dismiss scientific evidence (keep praying that rising sea levels won’t eat up more and more of the Louisiana coast Governor Jindal!), one could be forgiven for thinking that religious freedom in all its mischievous multiplicity was alive and well.

But not so these right-wing religious activists. Their drive to “restore” (that’s usually their term, as if something had been taken away) religious freedom began in 1990 with the Supreme Court ruling in the case Employment Division v. Smith. In that case the Court ruled against a Native American group seeking an exemption from an Oregon law prohibiting the possession and distribution of peyote despite the fact that peyote was part of the group’s religious ceremony.

Writing for the Court’s majority was none other than the deeply conservative and deeply religious Antonin Scalia. Even Scalia, therefore, re-affirmed a long-held Constitutional principle that religious belief cannot trump the law of the land. To allow otherwise would “permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.” Indeed, Scalia was actually quoting an 1878 Supreme Court precedent.

Religious activists, upset since the 1960s at what they see as the growing and pernicious separation of church and state, seized on that ruling to press Congress to pass The Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993 – and a spate of state versions of it have been passed subsequently. In this sense, Arkansas and Indiana were only playing catch-up with their recent bills.

But the fights over the potential persecution of faith-based florists were they forced to deliver centerpieces to a gay wedding have obscured the expansion of what “religious freedom” means to these zealots. What they insist on is that their religious faith must be permitted to inform their actions beyond their own homes and places of worship. In effect, they argue, their freedom gives them the right to impose their religious beliefs on other people even if the action involved violates the law.

How do we avoid precisely what Scalia (and a host of other judges) feared? That every religious person would “become a law unto himself?” Here’s where the Court’s appalling Hobby Lobby decision comes into play. In that ruling, the Court not only allowed corporate persons to have a religion but permitted those corporate persons to be exempted from Federal law if that religious belief was “deeply held” and/or “sincere.” The Court thus created a huge space for new religious exemptions to all sorts of laws. Which is exactly what many of these religious activists want.

Jindal picked up on both aspects of Hobby Lobby in his op-ed screed. Trumpeting his support of the “Marriage and Conscience Act,” currently in the Louisiana legislature, Jindal described its purpose as prohibiting the state from taking an “adverse action” based on “the person or entity’s religious views on the institution of marriage.” Note the addition of “entity.” That means corporate “people” along with the bipedal kind as the Court has now allowed. Likewise, Jindal invoked “deeply held religious conviction” and “sincerely held religious belief” in his essay and added a reference to those “who live their faith” as what needs to be protected.

That clarifies matters, doesn’t it? All we have to do is measure a person’s (or corporation’s) depth of religious feeling, figure out whether it meets the legally defined sincerity threshold, and then we can distinguish between people (or corporations) who deserve religious protection to practice discrimination and those who don’t.

In fact, of course, the legal standard being articulated by the Court and picked up by people like Jindal is utterly fatuous and entirely unworkable. It essentially asks courts to peer into people’s souls and to parse theological issues, not to judge actions and evaluate law.

So even while public support for same-sex marriage has grown swiftly and decisively, the forces of the religious right have countered by trying to expand what counts as religious freedom and where it can be applied. Think of the results as a subtle and dangerous prepositional shift: Their freedom of religion will necessarily shrink our freedom from religion.

Steven Conn will be the W. E. Smith Professor of History at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio in the fall. His most recent book is Americans Against the City: Anti-Urbanism in the 20th Century.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

How to Save the Planet: An Interview With Two Iconic Scientists

What happens when two iconic scientists talk about saving our planet? Read on to find out what happened when E O Wilson and Sean Carroll—two giants in their field—sat down to discuss just that.

Read more…



This Kentucky Hydro-Power Damn Is a Beautiful Building Site

There’s something serene about this panoramic view of the large scale construction site lit by the morning sun. The Smithland hydroelectric facility in Kentucky has been under construction since 2010—but as of this year it will generate 72 MW of new, renewable energy for the region.

Read more…



Valve ditches Skyrim paid mods plans after backlash

skyrim-820x420A few days ago, we talked about the plans that Valve had put into place that would allow paid mods to be sold for Skyrim via the Steam Workshop. Those plans for paid mods didn’t sit well with fans of Skyrim and Steam. The backlash against the plans was swift and brutal. It appears that Valve has taken the hint … Continue reading

Blu Selfie is the perfect smartphone for narcissists

Blu-Selfie-1Blu is releasing a new, unlocked Android smartphone, catering to millennials and selfie enthusiasts everywhere. The aptly named Selfie, focuses on generating high-quality selfies, but doesn’t neglect its other features. Most smartphones let focus on the main camera while taking a light-handed approach to the front-facing lens. Selfie boasts two 13MP cameras with Sony IMX135 sensors. The main camera can … Continue reading

DARPA EXACTO Bullet live fire demo shows repeatable performance

sniper-820x420Last year we talked a bit about the new self-guided sniper bullet that DARPA was working on. That bullet is able to guide itself to a target making long distance shots much more accurate in the hands of an experienced shooter. DARPA is back with new details about this self-guided bullet. DARPA has published a video shot back in February … Continue reading

SwiftKey's new keyboard corrects whole phrases

SwiftKey has a new Android keyboard that will autocorrect entire phrases. Named Clarity Keyboard Beta, it aims to constantly scan the last few words typed in order to offer better corrections than rival apps. Like other SwiftKey keyboards, it’ll also…

This Washing Machine Uses No Electricity Whatsoever

Going camping is usually a pretty dirty activity as you’d have to sleep in the wild, do your business in the wild, and the idea of washing your clothes and having fresh ones to wear, well that really depends on how well you pack. However if you’d like your camping trips to be a bit more comfortable, the the Drumi washing machine from Yirego is the perfect answer to your problem.

Unlike most washing machines, Drumi uses no electricity at all. It does require some power and that is human power as users will have to continuously stomp on a pedal to get Drumi working, but depending on how long you want the drum to spin for, it will just be a few minutes worth of work.

How it works is that users will put their clothes inside the drum. They’ll cover it with a cap, pour some detergent on top of it, and flush it down with water. They’ll then put another lid on top of the drum, step on the pedal and they’re good to go. The pedal basically spins the drum inside the device, much like a washing machine does.

There’s even a button you can press to release the dirty water, and if you want to spin dry your clothes, just keep stepping on the pedal until you think it’s just about done. It’s one of the more clever ideas we’ve seen not to mention pretty green too and a great way to keep your bills down. Drumi is only expected to begin shipping to customers in July of 2016, but you can pre-order it via Yirego’s website for $129.

This Washing Machine Uses No Electricity Whatsoever , original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.



Does The Apple Watch Really Use Sapphire In Its Display?

As we’ve seen in videos and heard the marketing promos from Apple, the Apple Watch and Apple Watch Edition will use sapphire crystal as its display, while the Apple Watch Sport will use Ion-X glass. However due to the curved nature of the display, there were some who were skeptical about the use of sapphire.

This is because sapphire when used as displays are typically made in one shape and style, so the curved form factor actually caused some to believe that maybe Apple isn’t telling the truth. Unboxing Therapy decided to find out by using a Diamond Tester to see if the display of the Apple Watch is truly made of sapphire crystal.

For those unfamiliar with the Diamond Tester, basically it’s a device used to authenticate certain materials, namely diamonds hence the name. It has a conductive tip that when put against materials such as sapphire and diamonds will light up the device, while normal glass will not have any effect. For those skeptics, it seems that they have been proven wrong as the Diamond Tester revealed that the Apple Watch truly does feature a sapphire crystal display.

In fact in the test, it was found that the level of sapphire crystal is higher than that of a more traditional timepiece which also uses sapphire crystal in its display. Previous tests have shown that the sapphire display is highly scratch resistant so if you’d like to have that peace of mind, you’d have to shell out at least $500 for that pleasure.

Does The Apple Watch Really Use Sapphire In Its Display? , original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.