MCC DAY! MCC DAY!
MCC DAY! MCC DAY!
love this team
A dig?
Interesting.
Great games. Curious to see how people will play with the new Build Mart now that they have some experience with it.
More progressive/left-wing parties currently do not stand a chance in the UK system unless they work with labour and Labour improves their popularity.
Not from there, but the UK does indeed have several other parties. Labour is currently polling in second place.
The issue is that the party that is polling in first place is Reform UK, which is far-right. Then the party in third place are the Conservatives, who are center right.
Since when is it indoctrination to have books about a kid having two mothers or fathers available in a school library ( This is about availability, not actual reading)?
Some people also just happen to be transgender. Why should there not be books about them available for those who want them?
The issue is that this isn't about them opting out of certain books being read themselves or even the kids reading those books. If I recall it is about not even having those books available in the school for those that do want to read them.
You still need to prove you individually were discriminated against as everyone does.
The only difference here is that there is no need to prove that in addition to discriminating against you they have also discriminated against others.
Considering proving discrimination is something that is already very difficult for minority groups that means she is still quite far from winning her actual case.
I see no reason why applying the same standard to everyone is an issue here.
There has not been a ruling on her actual case.
The only ruling here was that the same standards would apply for the courts if someone were to be claiming to have been discriminated against for being straight as there would be for discrimination against non-heterosexual people.
She was not rewarded at all so far as the SC did not rule on the merits of the case.
She still needs to prove she was discriminated against, just not that there was also a pattern of discrimination in addition to that.
No.
In this case it means that there is no need to prove there was a pattern of discrimination against heterosexual people, but just that she was personally discriminated against for being straight.
Note that she also hasn't won her own lawsuit. She is just allowed to continue it.
Great Games. Love the buildmart return.
While term limits are something that would help in some cases that isn't really the case for at least one of the districts here. Sylvester Turner was first elected to the US house in November and was Mayor of Houston for 8 years before that.
hihi,
Might I suggest linking your webtoon somewhere in your profile either through a pinned post or some other form (such as a card with your different profiles)
I'm appreciating the new pages, but the bluesky crop is not ideal and finding the rest of the story is a bit annoying as it stands.
Which in this case makes no sense as Republicans fully supported the ban on Tiktok and Trump was one of the first ones to call for it.
While I would definitely say a system like that would be great and probably better than a blanket ban it would amount to the same in practice.
Bytedance has already indicated that they'd rather stop operating TikTok than to share the algorithm with anyone.
Even with a shiv deck I generally prefer Time Eater over Awakened One.
Silent uses a lot of power cards and while Time Eater might be annoying you should have enough block/weaken to stop Time Eater from doing damage, while shivs allow you to time the turn end exactly so you actually get a full turn
hihi
South Korea also isn't currently as every single parliament member present voted to end Martial law.
It is bad that the president was able to declare it, but all political parties formed a united front to end it.
I believe we've already seen a few criminals who appear to identify as transgender in bad faith to try to get a lower sentence, which almost never works.
Some form of restriction is required (and there have been some restrictions on almost all sports for a long time). It is a question of which ones
I will note once again I do not believe people are currently identifying as another gender to gain an advantage in sports.
There are however people who would do so if there were no guards or restrictions at all beyond what they say.
I would argue beyond that that a minimum duration of testosterone suppression for trans women then makes sense on a professional level, where every minor advantage matters and especially so when we also want to prevent cis women from taking testosterone and still taking part in the women's category.
There needs to be some kind of test, whether that is a minimum duration of treatment, a psychological evaluation or something else.
Usually arguments like that are made in bad faith and I also do not believe it is currently happening or likely to happen considering the current rules.
However not requiring any confirmation of gender beyond the court of opinion would not be enough for some countries.
There needs to be some sort of restrictions on trans athletes in professional sports to stop certain countries from simply letting their athletes identify as transgender purely to participate in the women's category.
There have in fact been restrictions on certain intersex athletes that required them to lower their testosterone.
I do think physical abnormalities could be studied more to see how much of an advantage people gain from them. That is however very different from this situation.
Now all too often restrictions instead are created for all (both professional and recreational) sports, which is not required or helpful.
Similarly a blanket ban stops people who rightfully should be participating.
I mean I very much disagree with that. There are definitely restrictions that are sensible for professional sports (mostly with regards to how long and how much testosterone has been suppressed).
There needs to be more research into that, but bans will only prevent the needed studies from happening