Found pretty crazy that the inaugural game is going to be in Uruguay, it’s have something tk do with the first world’s cup? Also Paraguay and Argentina playing their first game as locals.
It's amazing the way "pro-lifers" don't actually believe in a right to life. At all.
This right here is what they really care about -- judging and punishing people for having sex. They view pregnancy as a consequence and so abortion is escaping a consequence. It has nothing to do with the rights of the fetus, just persecuting the uterus.
Because, after all, if you truly believed that pregnancy were a consequence, it would mean that you believe abortion should be legal for anyone that didn't take action to "deserve" the pregnancy. It means the right to life is contingent on the choices made or not made by the pregnant person. And a right that can be washed away by the choices made by a stranger is no right at all.
You just know if this guy got someone pregnant, he'd be driving them straight to the abortion clinic even if was across the country.
WOW does this article bend over backwards to obscure the likelihood that “treatment” is not going to be voluntary. First of all, this is not affected individuals applying for these services, as that would just be social services, a thing that already exists. Here’s how this system works:
Family members and first responders are among those who can now file a petition on behalf of an adult they believe “is unlikely to survive safely” without supervision and whose condition is rapidly deteriorating. They also can file if an adult needs services and support to prevent relapse or deterioration that would likely result in “grave disability or serious harm” to themselves or others.
As far as I can tell, this isn’t even remotely exclusive to homeless people, and it feels like burying the lead that Cali’s homeless population is mentioned at all. This is anyone with a psychotic disorder that can be forced into “treatment” by a badge or random family member who claims they’re “deteriorating.” If you think that sounds like it’s putting people with psychotic disorders at a even more heightened risk of being forced into conservatorships, you’d be right:
A person who does not successfully complete a plan could be subject to conservatorship and involuntary treatment, said Tal Klement, a deputy public defender in San Francisco who is among critics of the new process.
The article immediately moved to muddy this fact by following it up with two paragraphs that start with this sentence:
But the statute also allows the court to dismiss the proceedings if the individual declines to participate or to follow the agreement.
That’s all you need to read - “allows” is extremely different from “requires.” The court is in no way required to respect the wishes of the affected individual as the article irresponsibly attempts to imply, and as these courts are likely to be biased to view the affected individual as a crazy person and the people that reported them as Good Samaritans “just trying to help,” they are probably far more likely to opt for treatment, consensual or not, and this court becomes an excellent method of fast tracking vulnerable people into conservatorships.
Assuming “first responders” make any use of this, maybe this shields a few people from jail, but as cops aren’t really opposed to sending people to jail, it’s more likely they’ll just use this system when they suspect someone of having a psychotic disorder but can’t get them for an actual crime, if they bother to use it at all.
I enjoy walks and live in a California city. It is common to walk past a conspicuously homeless person who is having entire conversations with themselves as they walk past half aware of their surroundings.
I think the nobler intention is to try to get them help. How this works…? I guess we’ll see.
She was charged with manslaughter. I’m not sure of the degree though. Manslaughter basically means you didn’t intend to kill someone but you did someone something reckless that resulted in someone’s death. Premeditated murder is a completely different, and much more serious, charge.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.