It’s a decent sized movement, so you’d have to look into what’s happening in your neck of the woods. Mine is planning a protest outside an ICE detention center this week
The “pro-life” party
Steve Hou of Bloomberg LP, found the same phone on Amazon. Trump is selling his phone for $499, but it can be purchased on Amazon for $169. It can also be purchased in gold
Everything is a fucking grift
So if they want to use their influence for political ends, why are they tax exempt?
He’s a narcissist. People don’t get to his level of wealth by having compassion for the feelings of others. No billionaire ever gat there through their own hard work, they did it by taking advantage of the hard work of other people. He literally does not give a fuck. But narcissists aren’t typically born in a vacuum.
Do some research on his upbringing. His father was a narcissist and did all he could to make his son unfettered by compassion for others through constant power games and humiliation. He was raised in South Africa where there was a huge macho culture and it was expected that the strong took advantage of the weak. Elon himself was picked on mercilessly by his classmates, though so he literally had to cope by suppressing his own emotions and not caring about the feelings of most others. I say “most” because the exception would be the fact that he was constantly trying to earn the approval of his father because of his twisted upbringing. Even after his parents divorced when he was 9, he eventually went back to live with his dad despite the constant criticism. In short, Elon learned during his formative years that compassion was a weakness and you can’t just flip a switch to unlearn that.
He does copious amounts of drugs and sleeps with a constant stream of women to hide from any possible problematic feelings that would get in the way of his ambitions
Thanks for the taxpayer expense of having this obviously unconstitutional law immediately challenged, appealed, and ultimately settled by SCOTUS. Won’t it be fun if it turns out this is a new norm?
Just hoping my kid can graduate before this is officially a thing
“Sometimes I just like to be by myself and listen to my own thoughts. We can talk tomorrow though. You didn’t do anything wrong.”
No you have it backwards, it’s DOM. As in, “I was bad so my dom had to punish me.”
Yes, private organizations can set their own rules. That doesn’t change the basis of this ruling.
If a private club league had their own rules that said (among other things) “We do not tolerate promoting views that exclude on the basis of sexual identity during league events,” then the league would be within its rights to remove anyone violating that rule. Absent that, free speech applies. Especially for wearing something as vague as a pink bracelet.
Re: your example, there are many organizations that exclude on the basis of religion and sexual orientation. The Boy Scouts, for example, still require that members sign a Declaration of Religious Principle saying that they believe in some sort of higher power. This excludes atheists and agnostics. They also used to exclude homosexuals. The Supreme Court ruled in their favor back in the late 90s or early 00s that as a private organization they had the right to exclude whoever they wanted. They changed their stance on homosexuality voluntarily, but the SC ruling still applies. It is public institutions that cannot exclude, not private.
As far as this ruling goes, it’s not about the message it’s about the target and the fact that it was at a school function.
Don’t misunderstand, people. The key here isn’t that it’s hate speech. All kinds of unpopular views are protected by the First Amendment. This is why you can still see Trump supporters waving Nazi flags in parades. If it was just because it was deemed hate speech, well then we should all be worried because Trump’s government is now saying that anyone who preaches hate against America is subject to deportation.
The key is that it happened at a school event. The FA doesn’t apply to non-students at school events if students are the target of speech meant to harass or demean. If this had happened at a club soccer game as opposed to a school event they would have been protected.
Ron Howard: “It is.”
Do whatever you can live with. That said, you have other options besides all or nothing. You can tell him that it’s taxing to be around him and ask for specific behavioral changes you’d like to see to make things more tolerable. Whether or not he agrees to them is up to him, but you’re at least trying for a workable relationship.
I emphasize behavioral change because he can’t just flip a switch on his beliefs. No one can. Our beliefs are a conclusion based a number of factors including our experiences, the information we are exposed to, our emotions, etc. He couldn’t switch his off and on any more than you could.
If you really want to affect his beliefs he will have to feel like you hear and understand them first. Be curious without expressing judgement. If he feels heard he might be more open to reciprocating that feeling and hear you out.
But you’re not obligated to do that. If you can’t take it then be honest with yourself and take care of you. Just don’t get stuck in black and white thinking
So like, 1% of his annual salary?
DOGE. You’ve gotta be kidding me
I think what Bernie is saying is that for decades Dems have paid lip service to working class concerns while not actually doing much. In reality Dems have been much more beholden to corporate interests.
By the time these plans came out, too many working class folk were already disenfranchised. They saw a party that was vocal about social issues that frankly were not high on the list of priorities for most of them. They were more concerned that inflation was out of control and they could not afford basic expenses. Sure Trump was racist but at least prices were lower when he was in office, or so they would conclude. If he could bring prices down, they would go with him.
Basically Dems were just out of touch with the most important part of their base until it was too late.
I’m not sure what difference it makes here that it was a volunteer position. There was a background check (two, actually) just like there would have been if it was a paid position. Schools often use volunteers too to read to kids or tutor after school, etc.
I’m not saying churches are always this responsible. I’m saying we should applaud the ones that take steps to prevent this and work with law enforcement when those steps fail
Not to defend churches in general, but the article headline here is pretty misleading in calling this guy a youth leader. He was a volunteer. And, to the church’s credit, when this came out they immediately began cooperating with law enforcement and even referred anyone with more info to talk to the police.
I don’t like churches in general, but this one did as well as any other organization that has volunteers working with kids. They had background checks in place and did not try to cover anything up.
It depends. Location, race, social status, and luck determine what kind of experience someone gets