My man, raspberry jam is where it"s at. Perfect sweet/tart to PB ratio. No other spread has beaten it yet.

Living up to your name cro magnon

Del

Is your position that sexual abuse cant occur to an adult, that when it occurs it can and should be laughed off (what other physical abuses should be treated the same) or a third position entirely?

Are you trolling, or just a fool?

Sure, but you have the logic backwards. Viability isnt used so that people can get an abortion even though the baby can survive, its so the physician can make the judgement to deliver a baby that can survive instead of attempting an abortion - when the mothers life is in danger.

There is no magic cut off date, where all babies are ready to deliver or will die. So basically the math goes like this: physician determines the mother will die if the baby does not come out. If they determine the baby is viable --> the baby comes out and is alive via medical procedure (not abortion). If they determine that the baby is not viable --> the baby comes out and cannot survive via medical procedure (abortion). Fyi, in case you think oh well, keep the baby in: the mom dies, the baby is not viable to survive and dies too. Thats it. No one is aborting babies that could be birthed and survive.

“Viability is reached when, in the judgment of the attending physician on the particular facts of the case before him, there is a reasonable likelihood of the fetus’ sustained survival outside the womb, with or without artificial support. Because this point may differ with each pregnancy, neither the legislature nor the courts may proclaim one of the elements entering into the ascertainment of viability – be it weeks of gestation or fetal weight or any other single factor – as the determinant of when the State has a compelling interest in the life or health of the fetus.” Colautti v. Franklin (1979)

This is a different situation than early pregnancy abortions. Different areas of focus, rights, benefits, ethics etc. Dont treat both rights as requiring the same logic to support.

It seems to me, at least, no matter what someones position is on early term terminations, late term is a slam dunk obvious answer. Leave the decision to the parents and their physicians, not lawyers and legislators.

Sorry but that’s not true… either emergency c section at around 7 months onwards or regular delivery etc. No such thing as an abortion as far as Im aware. Is this what you think a “late term abortion” is?

What 9 month old baby has less rights than a newborn? Edit: or vice versa.

deleted by creator

Were the forecasts evented for him winning or losing?

Hurr durr

What? Unless I missed something, it gave access to individual accounts not master access?

McKenzie followed up later with a similar statement to the one today, saying “we don’t like or condone bigotry in any form.

Condone:

verb accept and allow (behavior that is considered morally wrong or offensive) to continue

Hardspace Shipbreaker

Ive been playing this non-stop. Why? Im not sure. But theres something just so satisfying about tearing down a spaceship in 0 gravity. Wish it had a VR option, would seriously consider investing in a VR headset to play it that way.

Ah, my mistake in giving you more credit than you deserve. Burden of proof.

While I would like to agree with you, because far too often people dont ask for a source in good faith, would have to be consistent with the etiquette and require that the burden of proof falls on the person that makes a claim.

The what now?

Just because people can consume pure lard, and gain a tonne of weight, it doesnt mean theyre not malnutritioned. It also doesnt mean they dont experience hunger.

If you take a step back and consider the primary question that needs to be answered is it

a) What weight is a measure of hunger/poverty - people must be over x weight irrespective if health and were good. b) What food availability us a measure of hunger/poverty - people must have reasonable acess to a basic set of nutritional inputs and were good.

You seem to be following a - people are fat, so hunger doesnt exist

When it would be equally truthful, with a different conclusion to say - people are feeling hunger and experiencing malnutrition. When they can eat, what they can afford causes increased body mass without fulfilling their nutritional requirements. They also continue to feel hungry.

Treat food similar to medicine, the good benefit is the target, but there are also side effects. Cheaper food has a worse profile - fewer (not none) benefits, and higher side-effects.

Theres also more complexity to this - poverty isnt just $. Education, transportation, time, exhaustion, health. Many intersections and impacts that paint a persons life.

If only there was some way to confirm, short of only reading the headline, if theres more to this.

Oh, apparently theres further text in the article, for example 29% said their financial situation is precarious. 11% say they regularly dont eat enough, so they have enough food for their kids, 24% say theyre very concerned with coping with the increase in food prices. Oh and 12%, within the past 6 months, have skipped meals while hungry.

So the article sources survey data, you’re basing your claims on better primary data I take it? Or maybe secondary public health database datasets? Something else?

LOL, America did what now? Invented English? Met an English fella the other day, born and raised in New York.