By extrapolating from there…there’s gonna be someone that is gonna make Trump look good.
This progression is necessary, otherwise the Democrats would not be able to sell every election as “the most important election of our lifetimes.” The escalation of stakes is required.
Texas killing this child for losing a pregnancy
Texas didn’t kill her for loosing a pregnancy - Texas killed her by making her losing the pregnancy take too long by terrifying doctors out of speeding the process along, causing her to be in and out of hospital ERs repeatedly while doctors essentially played “hot potato” with her despite all of them knowing what needed done out of fear of being thrown in prison for a century if they did it, causing her to eventually develop sepsis and die.
It’s much, much worse than “killing her for losing a pregnancy”, and exactly how awful it is and how it got to that point needs to be spelled out in detail. Otherwise you’ll have people pointing out that the Texas law has an exception for medical emergencies, and it needs pointed out and doubled down on that by the time the doctors were reasonably certain that a conservative Texas court would agree with them it was a medical emergency (aka she’d already developed a systemic infection), she was already doomed.
Are they? It literally points out “Who you voted for is secret” on the ad, right above where it says that people will know if you voted.
Anyways, why the fuck was he driving people out of the plains? Homies were just chilling in their iron chariots.
For the same reason as now - because Israel wanted their land.
On my instance you just click “Communities” at the top and it gives you a list of communities with three options at the top Subscribed/Local/All just like the main feed. Click all and you can browse or search the list of all communities, though the search is not great.
John Oliver did an episode on “stand your ground” ages ago
Doesn’t require stand your ground, unless you could reasonably flee the attacker. If they’ve got a gun it’s not too hard to argue that you couldn’t reasonably flee or they’d shoot you in the back.
Stand your ground just removes the duty to try to get away from an attacker if possible, and is only the law in some states.
Puerto Rico periodically votes on whether or not to pursue becoming a state, becoming a state doesn’t win except in one vote that was specifically a non-binding vote on the topic and that had much lower turnout than other votes on the idea.
DC was literally created specifically to not be a state, so that no state held the seat of the federal government.
Do you or have you ever worked in science? I did for a bit and that was not my impression.
I imagine it depends heavily on the field. In some fields there are ideas that one can’t seriously study because they’re considered settled or can’t be studied without doing more harm than any believed good that could be achieved. There are others subject to essentially ideological capture where the barrier to publish is largely determined by how ideologically aligned you are (fields linked to an identity group have a bad habit of being about activism first and accurate observation of reality second).
Because a carrier’s data on you is not your person or belongings. The companies holding this data are selling access to it, so it’s not being searched, it’s being offered.
In other words, the same reason as why they don’t need a search warrant if there’s a breaking and the business across the street volunteers their security camera footage, even if you’re on that footage.
instead of blocking advertising data, we should embrace it IMO.
imagine a world where users shove so much information at these tools that they can’t even tell what’s real or not. camouflage works better when everyone participates.
There’s an ad blocker that does exactly this. Called Ad Nauseam. Chrome blocked it from their store super fast, then blocked it from being installed in Chrome from 3rd party sites, then blocked known versions of it from being manually installed in developer mode. I used to run it set to a low percentage - if I “clicked” every ad they’d know to throw my data out, but if I click say 3% of them…
No, you can’t get fined for saying the N-word in the US. But, repeatedly shouting it while committing an assault pretty conclusively demonstrates it was a racially motivated assault, and lots of jurisdictions in the US have laws that aggravate a crime or add an additional charge if the crime was motivated by hatred of a protected class.
Those laws can (but almost never are) applied even if the member of the protected class is male, white, etc. I think the last time I heard of someone being given hate crime charges for doing something to a white victim was the 2017 Chicago torture case where the crime was streamed on Facebook. Two black men and two black women were involved, the men received bail of $800k and $900k, the women bail of $500k and $200k - in the end all did plea deals with the men getting 7 and 8 years in prison and the women 4 years of probation and 3 years of prison. Which demonstrates neatly how much sex plays into punishment in the US, since they were all part of the same case doing the same crimes.
It’s both. The criminal justice system treats white folks better than black folks, and women better than men. Depending on what exactly you’re measuring which one is the larger gap can go either way. For sentencing, sex means more than race - so she’d get a longer sentence if she were a black woman, but an even longer one if she were a white man, and a still longer one if she were a black man.
I’m actually surprised a white girl got a whole year for an assault. And not even a suspended sentence!
I’ve seen cases where it’s like “white woman stabs boyfriend in heart, boyfriend narrowly survives due to prompt medical attention, 30 day suspended sentence” or “woman sexually assaults minor boy, gets herself pregnant from the assault, no punishment for her and boy owes woman child support for being her victim.”
To be fair, we achieved flight by copying nature. Once we realized the important part was the shape of a wing more than the flapping.
This wasn’t about coke zero but about two batch numbers of the zero sugar version of minute maid lemon aid, in cans.
…and doing it with requirements that funnel state education funds to a political candidate is just…chef’s kiss
I have one of those ridge wallets (birthday present, decent wallet) and apparently they had a giveaway for a gold cyber truck. That would be the single most conspicuous vehicle on the road. Like, obnoxiously so. I feel bad for the winner.
she’s an activist, whose sole purpose in life has become making life worse for a certain group of people. incredibly vile and full of hate, and very vocal about it. using her platform consistently in the worst possible way.
She’s exactly what you’d expect from a 2nd wave radfem. It’s why so many of her ideological peers are also 2nd wave radfems. I’d bet if asked she’d tell you about how big an influence someone like Mary Daly was on her views on sex and feminism - Mary Daly was a 2nd wave radfem who likened trans people to Frankenstein’s monster and whose teaching career ended because of Title IX complaints related to her refusing to teach male students.
also she’s a bad writer.
She’s decent at storytelling but painfully awful at world building and thinking through how existing threads from previous stories might interact with the one she wants to tell this time. Her weaknesses wouldn’t shine through as much if she were writing individual, disconnected stories instead of multi-part series in a shared universe.
That’s easy - they’d come to Lemmy and become Lemmy mods to achieve the same thing.
I mean he did, but he both didn’t know that at the time and it’s not relevant to the goings on that night.
I’m just going to lead with this: he’s an idiot, and in an ideal world he would have not been in Kenosha that night at all.
That said, if you followed the trial and the evidence presented, it very obviously fit the definition of self defense.
I wish them the best in their civil trial, but unless they’re relying very hard on civil trials having a lower standard of evidence, are getting criminal trial evidence excluded, or are including new evidence not part of the criminal trial that makes a massive difference they probably won’t win.
Shooting Rosenbaum will likely have the easiest time if they can pay an ME to give contradictory expert testimony to what came from the criminal trial. Because while it’s on camera, you can’t clearly see what went on with their hands and the gun in the video, and have to rely on the ME and testimony to fill in the gaps.
Getting wrongful death civil damages for someone shooting someone who knocked them to the ground and was coming at them with a blunt object will be harder, but not as hard as for Grosskreutz, unless he can bar his criminal trial testimony from the civil case or come up with an excuse why his answers don’t mean what they appear to.
It really doesn’t. What it does is describe a religious rite that’s a sort of combined paternity test/abortion if she’s unfaithful. The idea being that the priest does his thing, she drinks the dusty water and if the child isn’t her husband’s she’ll miscarry on the spot. If she doesn’t miscarry, then God has proclaimed it’s his kid and he should have more faith in his wife.
There’s nothing in the description of it that would tell one how to trigger an abortion without divine involvement.
Being pro-life or pro-choice isn’t strongly genedered. It’s not like men as a class oppose abortion and women as a class defend it. I think you’d be shocked at the sheer number of women out there who oppose abortion, and the number of men who don’t. It would be more accurate to say that a swath of religious folks (Catholics and certain flavors of evangelicals) oppose it, and those in their social reach get pulled along with them, along with traditionalist conservatives who are all about controlling sexuality.