Just go on a trip every birthday. It works for me.

Slow down, my friend. First, recognize that women have and do vote Republican, too. As their friends or other women in their communities have to deal with horrible situations that are even vaguely similar to these, you can imagine how quickly their views are going to shift.

Actually, you don’t even have to imagine it. You can just look at some of the data we’ve seen from early voting around the country. It turns out that when you have laws that f*** over women in obvious and horrible ways, a lot of women react negatively to it. A fair amount of men, too.

The employees are more important than the boss. So yeah, I do count those jobs and feel it means something significant. Also, what does “logical” even mean to you? If the boss cut his own pay, he could have kept the employees. That’s just as logical, isn’t it? So you’re not talking about logic, are you.

If you want to talk about values, let’s do it. Please explain why multi millionaires (and richer) matter more than everyone else. Please.

You want to trust him after what happened in Ukraine? Are you out of your mind? And he’s admitted that he chats with Putin on a regular basis.

If the facts of the case are clear to you but they aren’t clear to doctors who actually live and work in the state, and are risking getting locked up for years or decades, and large hospitals that are part of gigantic corporations that have expensive lawyers working for them, maybe it’s because they know more than you, or maybe it’s because they are more worried about being cautious, because they know that the cops and the DAs down there are eager to arrest people.

All of which is to say, we don’t even have to look at the text of the law, because people are telling us the actual effect of the law. You’re pounding the statute but the statute’s not the problem. The enforcement of the statute is the problem. So you can keep on pounding it, but your energies are misdirected.

Hundreds of doctors and their lawyers disagree with you. Of course they could provide medical services, and see if local law enforcement decides to arrest them and lock them up. Or they could withhold medical services, because that’s what their lawyers say is a reasonable interpretation of the law.

In other words, it doesn’t really matter what you or I think. It matters what doctors and their lawyers believe is likely to occur. And we know what that is, because they’re telling us out loud, and they’re showing us through their actions.

Of course you’re entitled to interpret the law however you want to. I think many of us have done that over time, and sometimes we realize that we got it wrong, because we see that lawyers and courts don’t agree with us. Probably this is one of the times that you need to recognize what’s actually happening, and realize that your wishful thinking is just that. I’m sure many people would be happier if reality matched your thoughts, but it doesn’t.

Ha. They didn’t want to parent before, so you can be sure that guilt is the farthest thing from their minds.

I thought he killed himself. Ah well, maybe I didn’t read the article carefully enough.

If your argument is that “people will believe anything” when the name is “Character AI”, then I’m not sure what to make of your position… If there’s ever a time to say “you should have known it was AI”, this is that time. I can’t think of a clearer example.

It has to be there, because politics is connected with lawmaking, and open source software is dependent on laws.

A lot of people like to say that politics isn’t in their life or that they keep politics out of their life, but the reality is that’s just not true. The rules that govern society affect you, always, either with or without your input, either with or without your acknowledgment.

You’re probably trying to say that we should keep pointless politicking out of open source software, and I agree, but that’s going to come down to personal definitions of pointlessness.

It should go without saying that top military leaders and top spy agency leaders have considered what they might do under various circumstances.

Obviously it would depend on the details and we have no idea, but if Trump tries to brazenly push a coup, and it looks like it might be successful, you can imagine someone at the CIA considering whether they should fix the situation.

It’s a strange situation because we can only blindly speculate, but when people are trying to tell us that the sky is falling, it’s important to keep in mind that when you get to a coup d’etat, regular reasoning goes out the window. At some point, again depending on the details, it just doesn’t matter what the Supreme Court says.

And even the financial argument is a joke.

Teenage pregnancies mean less education, which means lower salary, which means more public benefits and less taxes. So the state loses money.

Teenage pregnancies mean more poorer moms and children, which means greater state expenses on health care, child care, and housing. More teen pregnancies means more unhealthy teen pregnancies, which means more ER costs from people with no money to pay for them.

And we could run the numbers, but the point is that we don’t need to. They needed to, and they didn’t, because the whole calculation is filled with unjustifiable assumptions about the importance of counting some things while ignoring others.

Linus says your reasoning is inaccurate.

This kind of article is kinda baitclick because it ignores the elephant in the room… If Trump is running a coup d’etat, what will people in power do? Will they sit there, like they did in 2000? If he’s audacious enough, they won’t. For example, if SCOTUS tries to decide the election (like they did in 2000), I think we would see complete collapse on many levels in many ways.

The long story makes it even worse. The cops were responding to a 911 call for a white man who was causing a big problem. They got there and talked to that person, and that person said that the black man across the street started it, or some such story. For reasons unknown (racism? lunacy?) the cops decided to take the word of the actual suspect, who would obviously lie to avoid getting in trouble.

Then the cops lied on the police report. They said the victim had resisted, but they didn’t give him time to resist before beating him. They attacked him less than a second after getting out of their car. Even if he had been able to hear, he would have still been beaten down. In the police report, they say he attacked them, but a quick view of the video proves it’s the opposite.

Yes, there are theoretical situations where cops need to use force right away, but the facts here don’t support it. A he-said-she-said situation where nobody is armed or fighting or running away, that’s a quick legal analysis. And even if hypothetically there were justification, they lied on the police report, which only shows that they knew it was wrong.

And after beating him down, and after his girlfriend explaining that he’s deaf, the cops still spoke as if he could understand them, and they refused to let the girlfriend use sign language to establish basic communication. To me, this last point feels worse than everything else. They simply refused to see him, or his girlfriend, as human beings that ought to be treated with any kind of basic respect.