Res

This. Leaving it to a free market has never worked. Humans aren't altruistic enough to be fair; every group has had to struggle and fight for their rights.

Well their worries are baseless and offensive, honestly. I mean logically thinking things through - why would a gay person *want* to be a leader of a group that rejects them for who they are? It borders on narcissistic to think your group must be so great that the people you exclude would be so desperate to lead it. Many are merely hoping just to be seen as human beings. It's similar to how people were all up in arms about transwomen assaulting people in bathrooms when a) trans people are *far* more likely to be victims, b) more GOP lawmakers have been arrested for sexual misconduct in bathrooms than trans people and c) there was nothing previously stopping cis men from assaulting people in bathrooms. Trans people in general see extremely high rates of homelessness and are frequently victims of homicide and rape, so to say they're persecuting others by asking for access to bathrooms is laughable. I can see this. What's ridiculous is the example of a bakery refusing to make a *birthday* cake for a lesbian.

Edit: double post, oops.

Nobody is going to be forcing any church to hire lesbian worship leaders. And 'homosexual lobby'? As for businesses, that's really a whole separate, sticky topic. I think there's a lot of hypocrisy present and I also think there's potentially dangerous precedence being set for health-care related businesses (it's also another reason why I hate that healthcare is tied to employers in the U.S.) But ultimately - the U.S. has a separation of church and state. So I do actually have an issue with any political stance that attempts to push a religion's moral issues onto the whole population. The same goes for religion in public schools.

Christians in the U.K., or U.S.? And I'm still sometimes surprised by how different the dominant U.S. Christian rhetoric is from what gets taught in Europe. Edit: Oh hey, coincidentally I saw this shortly after making this post. Is that even possible?! Or am I the only person who can't open up Facebook without learning of the dozens of things that Trump has done that day. Most of the time it's not so much what has he done, but what issue do we concentrate on today? Half the time I post nothing because there's too much to post. The fact that they're his allies are what's sometimes a plus (although granted, it's also sometimes a negative... basically it's all headache inducing). And most people aren't even going to be better off tax-wise.

"Arriving at the event, Trump said it was great “to be among friends” as he declared: “We are returning moral clarity to our view of the world.”" But Hillary would've done... what, again? Taken away guns or something? Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you weren't aware. :) My thought process was that he'd be more effective at actually passing legislature than Trump precisely because he is more of a politician. And this is just pure spite, either way.

Haha yes! At least I gave birth to her so I know she's definitely mine. Is Leo into anything in particular? We're still in a heavy dinosaur phase (10 months and counting...) with Niko. Nothing captures Anya's attention for very long though.

Mike Pence isn't exactly preferable given he's in favor of conversion therapy and is considered far-right even within his own party. The only 'good' thing is he's less likely to cause nuclear war. Robert Reich posted a conversation he had on his Facebook which is of no surprise if it's true; the main focus is on money, and on the tax cuts.

I'm glad someone appreciates it! ;) I've never really had baby fever but I did have a really strong desire to experience pregnancy/parenthood, plus I can't deny that it's super neat to see how your genes combine! 28 is when I first got pregnant so I understand the feeling! I always envisioned having a son - not sure why, just I somehow imagined a son would be more like me. I had Anya first and she has my coloring, but otherwise she is my husband's mini-me (so much so that she often really irritates him, it's disconcerting for some people to see all their personality traits echoed back at them, haha. I often have to intervene in their arguments and remind my husband that Anya is only behaving exactly as he does). And sure enough, along came Niko and he has my personality and fastidiousness exactly, just as I had imagined. I'm not normally so prescient but it seems I guessed right, there.

Ha, I just read that and was debating posting it. Honestly, I do believe he is senile. I'll try never to armchair-diagnose someone but many of his transcripts and tweets can't help but give the impression of someone who is. Agreed; still, that's a portion of his voter base who might at least care a little. And forget mere adultery, he bragged about outright sexual assault...

They definitely makes up a sizable portion of his voter base, but let's not forget that over 70% of Evangelical Christians - the moralizers - voted for and support Trump. I also know of quite a few middle-aged, middle-class folk who voted for him for more genuine reasons.

Same, and I actually think she has some great supports, too! Also: Kliff. Kliff we know virtually nothing about; he has one support and no story interaction, there's nothing to really either dislike or like about him. I generally don't make much use of characters about whom we know very little, but not only is Kliff always in my Echoes party, but he ended up with the largest number of kills both times. I like his design and expressions a lot.

Not only is he going on about it, but they spent an exorbitant amount sending Pence to a game to have him walk out in protest, and yes, it was staged. Good to see he's still taking credit for the previous administrations' effects on the stock market and what else can I do about the tax tweet except laugh? It'll mean unprecedented cuts for the 1% and a whole loss of funding to all kinds of assistance programs.

I said I'd only buy this game if a certain character was included and I'm sticking by that. This game has the type of gameplay I'd normally not touch. I've learned over the years what genres I do and don't like and generally life's too short to waste my time and money forcing myself to play a game simply because it's highly regarded. In general, aside from pure puzzle games I have a tough time playing games if there's not a character or story element that captures my interest. I do get attached to certain characters and I like to learn as much as possible about certain characters. If dialogue/supports weren't included in this game I probably wouldn't have preordered it, but since dialogue/supports have been included, it became a must-buy. And actually, I may dislike this game. I may slog through simply for the sake of supports. I hope to still gain enough pleasure from witnessing the supports first hand to justify the purchase, though!

I agree; at least in Birthright, he usually saves Ch. 10 for me; for me it's a challenge to do it without him. I do see that a lot of his viability is due to the Fuujin Yumi and yes, Mozu can be leveled to be his superior, but I've never not found Takumi to remain useful throughout hard, no-grind runs. Maybe he just suits my play-style better? I'm not always very patient so the fact he ignores terrain effects is a huge boon to me. I do also always keep him as a sniper, too.

Sewing is my main hobby (I make most of my clothes these days) but I feel like costuming is a whole other skill... or at least I find it daunting enough that I psyche myself out of it (although I did make the kids' hats/ears last year).

Exactly. It's just so easy to obtain a gun in the U.S. And this is the same reason why we would see suicides drop.

Bringing up other states is relevant as context; is it that California is being exceptionally lenient, or is there precedent established elsewhere? As we can see, the change in law actually brings California more in line with federal guidelines, so it's helpful to know that we're not looking at an outlandish anomaly here. So as a misdemeanor it means it's still illegal, the punishment just isn't as harsh. I haven't been able to go into individual lawsuits but it raises some questions: Was it unjust because sex workers were being prosecuted without being given a chance to divulge to potential clients their status? Is the issue that already vulnerable people were being targeted and given sentences that only made their situations worse, and prevented them from attending to their own health?

Aww winged Est! She looks so cute! It's really great when your son can't pronounce his Rs and when his favourite shoes are his Crocs; we are currently in Starbucks and he just yelled 'MY COCK FELL OFF.' @Rezzy what is Leo being for Halloween?

He didn't 'just lose it'. This was apparently months in the planning.

Blaming it on unspecified 'mental illness is a cop out to avoid talking about/understanding any of the other motives shooters have. That's an article from 2015 that is every bit as applicable here; as in the case of the Charleston shooter, Paddock was not diagnosed with any mental illness.

Here's something to mull over, prompted by a recent report of a man who raped a 12 year old now gaining custody of the child he fathered. (Wish I could say that was the first example I've heard of!) 7 states have no laws restricting a rapist's right to custody; many other states require a conviction to prevent custody (and convictions are rare); only a handful of states errs on the side of the victim and has laws restricting custody without a conviction necessary. Granted, in that article it states the 12 year old made her own decision to keep the baby. However, if abortion is restricted/made difficult to get (which it already is in many states, and the young and poor don't necessarily have the time/money to travel to obtain an abortion), not only does the rape victim not have a choice in having the baby, but is quite likely to be forced to interact with her rapist and perhaps even be forced to share custody with him.

I agree; the better solution here might be legalizing prostitution, which would allow for less stigma to be attached to getting tested.

Here's some more information about the reasoning behind the law: You might like to check the chart I posted; in several eastern states knowingly transmitting HIV isn't a crime at all.

For some perspective, it is not a felony in all states. Thirty-something states have laws regarding the transmission of HIV; in some it is a misdemeanor and in others it is a felony. In Alabama, for example, it is a misdemeanor. Iowa has the strictest laws and in Connecticut, as an another example, there are no laws at all. The full table is here. This was the federal stance in 2010: