What’re they going to do next, make him move from the country to the city? Make him marry a woman who out ranks and out performs him at work? Make him protect protect people for free as a service to his community, nation and world? Make him fight a billionaire capitalist? Make him fight against injustice in our systems? Make him empathize with humanity on a fundamental level? Make him refuse to kill?
Jesus, next they’ll make Green Arrow a lefty!
Unlimited tax free contributions to a Satanic Temple sponsored Super PAC? And I can write off my donations as charitable since they go to a religious organization? It’s fucked up, but that is absolutely what the Evangelicals and Mormons are about to do. Let’s make them regret it.
AFAIK, current Supes is perpetually 28ish. So, he was born/arrived under Bill Clinton’s administration. But Trump is trying to denaturalize people who have birthright citizenship without citizen parentage, so i dont think it matters.
Pfft, you think the Trump administration would give him the benefit of the doubt.
Is thst still canon? I know it was officially changed at least by New 52 to be baby Kal-El in the ship from Krypton again. And then Post-Crisis canon was merged with New 52 Canon with Rebirth and Doomsday Clock, but I haven’t read a comic in years now. No idea what they settled on as his new origin. Either way though, non-lawful entry or born here with non-citizen birth parents, he would be considered an illegal or stateless immigrant under the current government. There is no getting around that Republicans.
So does my homemade mayo shower.
I’d drive the bus.
If anyone should be shot or exiled, it’s hateful prices like this that endanger innocent lives. But no, it’s the browns and the trans that are the real danger, apparently.
Zombie or no zombie, it’s how I’m going out.
The microwave background is like a rainbow. When you move, it appears to move. You’re always at the “center” of it.
You leave me and my gallons of bunker mayo alone.
- Including anecdotes
- Written in the first person
- Tangents and nonlinear storytelling
Weird that AI can’t handle talking in the first person. Why just the other day I, a human, was saying to my sister, who is also human, about how strange AI is. See, she was grew up in another home with her mother where they didnt use as much technology. We shared a father who fought in Desert Storm. His favorite color was blue, like the kind you see in very thick ice. See most people think ice is just clear, but that is only becuase you need a lot of ice to properly refract light into its true blue color. Refraction works because colors come from different wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation, and those wavelengths bend at different angles when refracted by passing through transparent materials… what was I saying? Oh yeah, AI is strange.
Space and time are the same thing. Spacetime. Time travel would necessarily also by teleportation if you are traveling instantaneously through spacetime. Unless of course your travel is continuous like it is currently for all of us, just sped up, slowed down or reversed.
Also there is no objective point of reference for location in the universe, only relative points of reference. In other words, you are always some distance in some direction from some thing. But you never have objective stable coordinates relative to the universe itself. There is no “center” or other fixed point of the universe. So the earth is moving, yes, but only relative to other independent celestial bodies. And those bodies are moving, too, relative to other bodies. Their movement is always relative to a non-absolute frame of reference. No movement is objective to the universe, it’s all relative.
So it would be illogical to expect the earth to have moved X miles away in Y direction if you teleported one second into the past/future because that would presuppose that your location was objective and absolute in the universe at the point of time traveling and the earth moved relative to your absolute location. It would break known physics if that were the case, as much as time travel itself would.
Tbf, if it comes to that, any nation or cooperative group of nations can do this without US law doing a damn thing.
600g? Those are rookie numbers. You call that American size? Our smallest jars are 390 (15 oz) grams. Regular and large jars are 780 (30 oz) and 1248 grams (48 oz). And they do have ridiculously big jars too, 1 gallon jars, i.e. 128 oz and 3328 grams, for, like, restaurants and doomsday preppers… or dudes that just really love mayonnaise, I guess.
The real download button only shows up after 30 seconds.
As another said, reasonable and articulable suspicion is required to id in every state and city in the country regardless of any lower laws or department policies. However(!), they do not have to share that reasonable suspicion with you at all, and can still demand ID without giving it to you. They can have reasonable suspicion against you that you are not aware of, such as matching a description for a crime you’re not involved in. And They could very well have no reasonable suspicion and can lie in the report later if they need to justify it. So long as there isn’t evidence contradicting them, the cop’s word is assumed as fact. So a demand for ID that is lawful is indistinguishable from an unlawful one if they don’t give you the details of their suspicion because you have no way to know if such reason exists or if it’s reasonable or not.
So the 4th amendment of the US Constitution, which outlines the freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, protects people from being forced to verbally identify or show documents of identification without reasonable cause, among other things. What that has been interpreted to mean by the SCOTUS is that, while they can always request ID without it being a lawful order, a request you can deny without consequence, any policy or state/local ID law that requires identification upon officer request without any other reasonable cause is unlawful. In other words they cannot demand id for no actual reason nor punish you for failing to ID without said reason.
At minimum, they need “reasonable and articulable suspicion” of a real crime that has happened, is happening, or is about to happen, in order to legally require you to ID yourself in every state, district, and city in the country (with the exception of if you are driving a car and get pulled over for a lawful infraction, you must provide your license to prove you’re allowed to drive the vehicle). “Reasonable and articulable suspicion” means that there are real facts that can be pointed to that a reasonable person would deem as a likely indication of crime, not hunches or racial profiling. Some states have higher levels of requirements in order to ID someone, but none can have lower requirements.
BUT, the unfortunate and infuriating truth is that they do not need to actually explain their reasonable and articulate suspicion to you at the time, which ultimately means that they dont have to have it until they justify it to the court much later. They could be just demanding it for no reason unlawfully. Or they could be demanding it because they just saw you pick pocket someone, or someone pointed you out as someone that threatened them, or you match the description of the person that just broke a bunch of windows nearby. All of those things qualify at reasonable suspicion allowing them to ID you in places where that is the minimum requirement. Even if you did nothing wrong, you could still match a description but aren’t the right guy, or they thought that saw you do something unlawful but were actually mistaken. It doesn’t matter. They still have reasonable suspicion unless you somehow factually dispel that suspicion. If you do not dispel that suspicion (maybe because they didn’t even explain their reasons in the first place) and they demand ID, you can be lawfully required to present it even if you did absolutely nothing wrong and don’t have a clue why they are asking at all.
In other words, if they demand ID and don’t explain why, there’s functionally way to discern at the time if the demand is lawful or unlawful even if you have committed no crimes. So you either comply or go to jail and argue your case in court later, regardless of the truth. And btw, even if they had absolutely no reasonable suspicion to lawfully demand ID at the time, they can just lie to justify it. If the lie is not demonstrably shown to be a lie by other evidence, it’s assumed to be true. So… enjoy your “freedoms”, I guess.
Just to be clear, feminism isn’t about not being attracted to beautiful women. It’s perfectly human to admire someone’s beautiful features, regardless of anyone’s gender. Feminism is about respect, equality, rejecting prescribed roles and limitations placed on gender, and acknowledging and addressing privilege and patriarchal systems of society.
Notice none of those things means you can’t still like the sight of boobs, butts, legs, abs, biceps, or whatever gets you excited. It does mean that you shouldn’t reduce someone’s value to those things, nor should your excitement about seeing someone’s beautiful physical attributes become a problem for them, like if you harass them or catcall them over it, or worse.
But Emma is well respected, not only as an actress but as an advocate, and she’s there to represent a great cause to the UN. They can respect her and her work and message and still think she’s a knockout at the same time. They’re not mutually exclusive, and that’s a pretty relevant part of feminism, divorcing worth as a person from sexuality and attractiveness.
On the one hand, I do not want politicians’ opinions to constantly chase polling numbers. They shouldn’t cynically change their views like their underwear as it suits their electability, only learn and evolve gradually as we all do. And when they firmly believe in something, they should have principles and stand by those principles. For those that are doing that, I admire their resolve and integrity. On the other hand, their principles are shit, and they need to go.