That’s their money making model, target people who need mental Healthcare, tell them it’s not a mental health problem, it’s a spiritual problem, and they need to pay and participate in their religion and avoid mental Healthcare.
It was Hubbard’s favorite target. In all honestly, the treatment was pretty horrible and used indiscriminately in the past. It’s now used in much more focused and responsible ways when nothing else works.
so technically (historically) electro shock therapy has been used more akin to Pavlovian training. where as ECT is more along the lines of helping develop muscle mass or the ability to use them more effectively/efficiently as you can externally actuate them that way.
From what i understand, it’s really commonly used in physical therapy to help with that general line of work.
Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Associated Press:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
Every state should be required to put abortion on the ballot this year. (if a direct vote hadn’t happened since the overturning of Roe.) States with trigger laws shouldn’t be allowed to implement decades old laws that were passed by a old and dying generation.
Leave it to the doctor and the one who is pregnant. No one is seeking to abort at 8.5 months unless there is a serious medical reason. So yeah leave it to the doctor and the one who is pregnant.
I mean I would, but I’m also a man that knows better than to be in that situation so I got sterilized. If someone wishes to abort at 8 and some or even 9 I have no ground to stand on when it comes to someones life that doesnt even involve me
Sometimes when it comes up I like to say we should allow abortion up to 20 months, just to anchor the conversation a little. Little door in the face bargaining.
Yeah, there’s not a single woman who put up with the aches, morning sickness, tiny bladder, mood swings, gas, swollen joints, and everything else that accompanies pregnancy, for nine months before deciding she really didn’t want to be pregnant.
The only reason women delay getting abortions is either something happens late in gestation that puts the life of the mother or the viability of the fetus as risk, or Republicans put up a bunch of arbitrary obstacles.
What you are not thinking of is that there are psychologically instable people who are not able to make a conscious decision for themselves for a certain time or who just follow through with impulsive decisions. Also there are people being forced to do things by others.
Having medical reasons for a late abortion is one thing (while still being allowed to have aan abortion withourt any reasons up to a certain point of time), being allowed to abort whenever you want without any restrictions just something totally different.
An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. The guy I’m answering to is demanding either abortion with no restrictions or no abortion at all. So it is first of all not about what is happening, but about what would be allowed to happen. Abortion with no restrictions would make this generally legal.
That is not the definition of an abortion otherwise a birth would be considered an abortion. An induced labor at 9 months would be a birth. We already have laws on the books to prosecute people who kill live individuals.
The reason there should not be restrictions is because we do not need law enforcement analyzing every fucking later term abortion. Only 1% are at or past 21 weeks and the majority of those are at 21 weeks. The ones that occur after are from women who do absolutely want a child but there are complications with the fetus or the mother’s health. These women should not have to fear being arrested because they are aborting a non viable fetus which they will likely spend thousands of dollars to do. And if you think that is an unlikely scenario where the police would make an arrest, I have some bad news for you: women have been arrested for miscarriages. Hell, one woman was arrested after being shot caused her to miscarry.
So how do you define an abortion if not as a termination of pregnancy? The reasons you gave in my eyes are rather reasons to reform the American police system. How would police even know of a miscarriage or an abortion? Most countries have duty of confidentiality for medical staff?
Also there is still a difference between restriction and prosecution and restrictions can be more or less restrictive. If there are medical complications an abortion shall always be allowed and if not in my opinion only up to a certain point into the pregnancy. Starting at somewhere around 23 weeks a fetus is able to survive outside of the womb, so besides medical reasons I’d set a cut somewhere there.
Wait are you not American? Have you been following what the conservatives in America have been doing?
They’ve taken any common sense rule and stretched it to the breaking point. And after Roe v. Wade was struck they’ve made abortion completely illegal in large swaths of America.
They have several ways to find out. They’ve mandated hospitals to report any they find out about with stiff penalties for not doing so. Doctors are liable for 99 year prison sentences for performing one. Anyone can inform the police if someone they know is suddenly not pregnant anymore. Anyone can sue a former pregnant woman and she cannot get her legal fees paid for even if she proves it was a miscarriage. This all includes penalties for getting an abortion out of state.
Before Roe v Wade was struck they passed law after law to make it as hard as possible to get an abortion before the 22 week cut off. Including waiting periods meant to artificially delay things and run out the clock and closing down places you could get an abortion until some states had only one or two clinics in the entire state. Then they also funded “pregnancy crisis centers”, whose entire purpose was to obfuscate the entire process.
So yeah some people want no legal restrictions because the conservatives have proven they can’t be trusted with them.
Yeah we get that. But working on the cause is going to take a bit longer. It requires some reforms that our system is set up to make really hard. For now treating the symptoms is about all we can do.
If you pay enough you find one and if it is not restricted in any way it is also legal. I’m not against abortions, but I think there need to be at least some regulations.
Sounds like a privatized healthcare problem. Most people getting abortions are not able to pay for expensive doctors anyway.
This was extremely rare during Roe and will continue to be extremely rare, that shit doesn’t happen unless it’s a risk of harm to the carrier. All that law would do is put women at risk.
Let the medical experts write the regulations, like they do for every other medical procedure.
Shit in the ninth month it’s not an abortion unless the fetus itself is nonviable. Otherwise it’s a C-Section birth. Nobody is killing the fetus unless it’s absolutely necessary or before viability.
That’s a C-section birth. There are not abortions in the ninth month unless the fetus has become nonviable, which is extremely rare. More common is Mom gets hurt and the fetus has to be born early. In which case it gets care as a premie baby and all the help the hospital can give it to live.
Again. Ninth month abortions do not happen. Anybody trying to get your vote or your money by telling you they happen is lying to you.
I am not even American and I guess I’m discussing on a rather ethical way and too far from the reality America is facing right now.
My only point was that if you’d allow abortions without any restrictions and simply define an abortion as a termination of pregnancy you’d also allow this.
I’d still rather vote for this than the abolition of abortion, just to be clear, but this would also be choosing one minor bad thing over the other.
I fucking wish every state could. Texas law makes it pretty much impossible to get abortion access on the ballot. Abbott and crew knew exactly what they were kicking off when they signed their “heartbeat bill” pre RvW reversal. They knew they were laying thw groundwork to turn women into brood mares.
Our ballot initiatives need to come from our legislature itself, and then the voters get to say “Yeah I like that”, or “Nah not about it”.
“For Texans to gain a direct say in changing these policies, the GOP-run Texas Legislature would need to pass a proposed constitutional amendment, which voters would then need to approve. (This yay-or-nay procedure is the only statewide policy-making power that regular Texans currently enjoy; voters weighed in on 14 such proposals from the Legislature Tuesday). One reason the Lege doesn’t want to give voters the initiative is fairly obvious: It would mean relinquishing some power—and giving interest groups a way to pass laws without lining elected officials’ pockets.”
The only one in doubt of making it on the ballot is in Arkansas where the secretary of state is pulling out all the stops to invalidate the payed canvassers signatures.
In Arizona it’s going to blow up the numbers. They had to fight to repeal an 1864 law and now it’s defaulted to a no exceptions 15 week law. So yeah, it’s a big deal in Arizona and likely to give the Democrats a boost in statewide offices. The state legislature is still hopelessly gerrymandered though.
I actually think a core part of being republican has to do with hating someone and feeling superior to them. It can revolve around sex, education, accent, culture, religion, sexual orientation, government structure, or skin color, but they have to hate on someone. You can plot the generations of conservatives by who they (primarily) hate at any given time.
They have to wrap themselves in their hate-blanket and fantasize about how they’ll have their AR-15 locked and loaded when the baddies come around. First they need to be scared, so they make up stories and lies about how “the other” corrupted their children, stole their jobs, took the government assistance, or performed DDOS on their interview, and then talk with friends or family on how evil the other is. Then they get great pleasure in having a big hate-orgy and trying hard to “trigger a liberal” spewing their made up hysterical bullshit.
A short list who’s-who hate list for conservatives: communists, socialists, civil rights activists, labor unions, abortion rights people and doctors, environmentalists, academics, immigrants, “the gays” (all LGBTQ+ individuals), muslims, transgender people, “mainstream media”. They’ve got to hate someone.
It’s why I don’t think humanity will ever get along unless an external, immediate threat unites us. Aliens or something.
What like a foreign dictatorship meddling in your democratic process? Or maybe that’s not existential enough - what about an urgent planetary climate crisis caused by a greedy minority trying to steal or planet’s limited resources to turn into useless stock?
Hmm, probably, but I feel like humanity would largely come together, or split into two camps.
I would envision either “everyone against the demons”, and the few who are with them are a small, covert minority, kind of like criminals, or humanity splitting into two camps, which would still be division, but arguably less divided than how we currently are.
To this point, how could we increase the number of people who take the side of humanity?
My thinking is that reducing anomie and inequality, increasing the bonds between people, all help move that number in a positive direction, as more of us realise that we need eachother.
This is my sneaky way of saying that we could be doing this now. That sure, maybe there will always be those who are just in it for themselves or a tiny in-group, but that’s no excuse for fatalism/doomerism.
IE we don’t have to wait for baleful aliens or demons spewing forth from hellgates. If we’re not waiting for the perfect unifying scenario, we can start moving the needle in a positive direction now. :)
This is what happens when you don’t hold criminals accountable for their actions. If we’d actually been tough on these assholes, then we wouldn’t be in this predicament. What are we going to do when all these states say that Trump won? If the past is any indication, the Democrats will cave and let Trump take office, or will bring their case to the SC who have shown that they don’t give a shit about democracy and will install a Republican regardless of the election outcome.
We should have tried those responsible for January 6 and held them accountable, including long prison sentences. I’m looking at you, Trump, Gohmert, MTG, and anyone else who actively tried to overthrow our government or gave in-depth, secret tours to groups that tried to.
Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Associated Press:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
The article says that, unfortunately, they’re on kind of shaky ground here.
The action came after Musk and Trump held a two-hour conversation on social media platform X on Monday night, during which Trump complimented Musk’s ability to cut costs by saying he would not tolerate workers going on strike.
“You’re the greatest cutter,” Trump said during the conversation. “I mean, I look at what you do. You walk in, you just say: ‘You want to quit?’ They go on strike - I won’t mention the name of the company - but they go on strike. And you say: ‘That’s okay, you’re all gone.’” Musk chuckled but did not respond to Trump’s comments, making it harder for the NLRB to find him liable for making illegal threats to workers at his companies, said Wilma Liebman, chair of the NLRB under former President Barack Obama.
Under federal law, workers cannot be fired for going on strike, and threatening to do so is illegal under the National Labor Relations Act, the UAW said in a statement.
I totally agree that they violated that law in spirit, but I don’t know if the NLRB will go for it.
From the WSJ article covering this suit: “The UAW, which has endorsed Kamala Harris, the presumptive presidential nominee for the Democrats, has been eager to blunt the former president’s appeal to working-class voters by painting him as a friend of the wealthy.”
No shit he’s a friend of the wealthy. He keeps insisting he is wealthy himself, while threatening anyone that wants to actually verify that for decades. And dealing with fraud charges for various financial “irregularities”.
Nope, most states require either a certain percentage/number of registered voters for a party or a state-wide petition to get onto the ballot. The only 3rd party on all 50 states’ ballot is the Libertarian party. The Green party is a distant 4th place, as they often need to regather signatures and new petitions every 2-4 years.
If a new party was formed for 2028, it might get enough ground in one state, not any to really sway the balance of the Electoral College.
It's that he lied on his forms about his residence. These people are fucked up. No idea why he needed to lie about living in NY, but when you fill out these kinds of forms, you're not allowed to fuck around, rightly.
oh, i understand why he was disqualified. but like you, it doesn’t make any sense as to why he would lie. i guess you can trust a brain worm to fill a form accurately?
“The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves”
US Constitution Amendment 12
The presidential and vice presidential candidates that the electors vote for cannot be from the same state.
He has absolutely no shot of winning any electoral votes or even a state’s popular vote. RFK is not a serious candidate. He’s a crazy person who happens to have a well known name that others are using to try and spoil an election.
If he falsified his permanent residence so that he could side step a (admittedly stupid) rule that state electors votes don’t count if both the president and vice president candidates are from their state, then he falsified his application for nothing, since he has no chance of winning CA in the first place.
It’s from the 12th amendment. A state elector must vote for at least one candidate from a state other than their own. So electors from Nevada could place both their Presidential and Vice Presidential electoral votes with an all-California ticket but California electors may not. There was talk of Kamala picking Newsom for VP but she’d have to change her residency for that to happen. Everyone would know that would be BS and possibly cost her California’s electoral votes or her candidacy in the second state, so she picked Walz instead (not the only reason but you get the idea). Kennedy got caught pulling a fast one so here we are.
If you don’t actually reside at your legal residence, it’s invalid. It’s like moving to a new house and not updating your driver’s license. You don’t get to claim that you live at your old house - your license just becomes invalid until you fix it.
news
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.