Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-La.) condemned the Supreme Court on Friday following its ruling legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide.
“The Supreme Court is completely out of control, making laws on their own, and has become a public opinion poll instead of a judicial body,” the 2016 contender said in a statement.
Can we go back to the 2000 election with this please? (yes, I do mean the election Bush won by a 5-4 vote).
“If we want to save some money, let’s just get rid of the court,” Jindal added.
Friday’s historic 5-4 ruling ensures that states recognize same-sex marriages under the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
Jindal later said that the ruling fundamentally redefined the institution of marriage.
Which has happened quite frequently so far.
Many laws in the history of the United States have addressed marriage and the rights of married people. Common themes addressed by these laws include polygamy, interracial marriage, divorce, and same-sex marriage.
For example – in 1880 the age of consent was 12 or 13 years. Example. Less than 150 years ago, adults were allowed to have sex with 7 year olds in Deleware. Is this the history Christians tout when they say they want to preserve the “sanctity” of marriage?
“Marriage between a man and a woman was established by God, and no earthly court can alter that,” he added.
You mean like it was altered numerous times already?
If somebody would come up to me and say, “Look, Hayden, here’s the thing: This Snowden thing is going to be a nightmare for you guys for about two years. And when we get all done with it, what you’re going to be required to do is that little 215 program about American telephony metadata—and by the way, you can still have access to it, but you got to go to the court and get access to it from the companies, rather than keep it to yourself”—I go: “And this is it after two years? Cool!”
Women's deodorant scents: rose, cotton, spring, meadow Men's: WINTER ICE, SHARKNADO, GLACIER PUNCH, ANTIFREEZE, GUN
— Sophie Gadd (@sophie_gadd) December 1, 2014
IMF Chief Economist Olivier Blanchard has said that Greece needs to slash pension spending by 1% of GDP in order to reach its new budget targets. The Greek government continues to resist, arguing that Greeks dependent on pensions have already suffered enough. But it has yet to put a compelling alternative to its creditors.
What depresses us is how little attention has been paid to one major area of Greek government spending that seems ripe for the ax: defense spending. Greece spends a whopping 2.2% of GDP on defense, more than any NATO member-state save the United States and France. Bringing Greece into line with the NATO average would alone achieve ¾ of what the IMF is demanding through pension cuts.
Greece has long argued that its defense posture is grounded in a supposed threat from Turkey – also a big spender on things military. But surely the United States and the major western European powers can keep a cold peace between NATO allies at much lower cost.
So why don’t they? German and French arms-export interests surely explain the silence on the creditor side: Greece is one of their biggest customers.
With Greece sliding towards default and economic chaos, such silence is indefensible.
Conservative religious schools all over the country forbid same-sex relationships, from dating to couples’ living in married-student housing, and they fear they will soon be forced to make a wrenching choice. If the Supreme Court this month finds a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, the schools say they will have to abandon their policies that prohibit gay relationships or eventually risk losing their tax-exempt status.
The religious schools are concerned that if they continue to ban gay relationships, the Internal Revenue Service could take away their tax-exempt status as a violation of a “fundamental national public policy” under the reasoning of a 1983 Supreme Court decision that allowed the agency to revoke the tax-exempt status of schools that banned interracial relationships.
DAMASCUS—Saying its doors were open to anyone with hate in their heart, sources at non-denominational terrorist group Universal Soldiers of Vengeance told reporters Friday that the organization welcomes radicals of all faiths. “Unlike other terror groups that can be too narrow and dogmatic, we encourage our members to use whichever religious justification they most identify with when indiscriminately slaughtering scores of innocent people,” said USOV spokesman Rahman Hasemian, who noted that the group is open to perpetrating massacres in the name of God, Allah, Buddha, Krishna, or dozens of other deities. “We each have our own path to opening fire on a crowd of unsuspecting villagers or blowing up a public market, and there is room for each and every kind of religiously motivated violence here. We must always remember that the complete disregard for human life we share is stronger than the beliefs that divide us.” To determine whether USOV is a good fit for them, Hasemian added that any and all bloodthirsty zealots are always encouraged to stop by a meeting and execute a hostage in the name of whatever higher power they believe in.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that President Obama’s health care law allows the government to provide nationwide tax subsidies to help poor and middle-class people buy health insurance, a sweeping vindication that endorsed the larger purpose of Mr. Obama’s signature legislative achievement.
The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that President Obama’s health care law allows the government to provide nationwide tax subsidies to help poor and middle-class people buy health insurance, a sweeping vindication that endorsed the larger purpose of Mr. Obama’s signature legislative achievement.
The 6-to-3 ruling means that it is all but certain that the Affordable Care Act will survive after Mr. Obama leaves office in 2017, and will give it a greater chance of becoming an enduring part of America’s social safety net.
“We really should start calling this law Scotus-care,” Justice Scalia said, to laughter from the audience.
For his next dissent Scalia is just going to slap his dick on a photocopier and submit the printout.
In conclusion, every flag is awful and needs to be fixed. Just not all for the same reason.
As helium supplies start to dwindle, the prices have already started to rise, and party balloons are taking a back-seat to the more serious applications. A hundred years down the line, a party balloon might be about as precious as a gold ring.
“With this party balloon, I thee wed.”
We can go ahead and make helium the way much of the existing subterranean helium was made: Radioactive substances that release alpha articles are releasing helium ions which can bond with available electrons to form helium.
The best part is how fast it is. A 1-Curie alpha source (such as the standard for the unit, 1 gram of Radium-226) can produce 1 kilogram of helium in just 130 million years.
Or let’s form an expedition to mine valuable Helium from its natural home, the Sun, to conduct important magnetic observations, and, if time and resources allow, to also collect the egg of the Sun-fowl if any should dwell there. Of course we’ll go at night. If you are of hardy flesh and stout heart, please write me c/o the Royal Society.
The UK is one of only nineteen countries worldwide, and the only EU member, that still recruits 16 year olds into its armed forces, (other nations include Iran and North Korea). The vast majority of countries only recruit adults aged 18 and above, but British children, with the consent of their parents, can begin the application process to join the army aged just 15.
It is the poorest regions of Britain that supply large numbers of these child recruits. The army has said that it looks to the youngest recruits to make up shortfalls in the infantry, by far the most dangerous part of the military. The infantry’s fatality rate in Afghanistan has been seven times that of the rest of the armed forces.
A study by human rights groups ForcesWatch and Child Soldiers International in 2013 found that soldiers who enlisted at 16 and completed training were twice as likely to die in Afghanistan as those who enlisted aged 18 or above, even though younger recruits are, for the most part, not sent to war until they are 18.
The youngest recruits from the poorest backgrounds are often enlisted into front-line combat roles. In fact, the very youngest recruits – aged between 16 and 16 years, 3 months, are only allowed to join combat roles. These non-technical jobs typically involve very limited education and training that becomes virtually worthless to them upon leaving the army.
The public is finally starting to learn what security experts have been warning for years: the US government has no idea what it’s doing when it comes to cybersecurity. Worse, the government’s main “solutions” may leave all our data even more vulnerable to privacy violations and security catastrophes.
The effects of the massive hack of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) continue to ripple through Washington DC, as it seems every day we get more information about how the theft of millions of government workers’ most private information is somehow worse than it seemed the day before. (New rule: if you read about a hack of a government or corporate database that sounds pretty bad, you can guarantee it be followed shortly thereafter by another story detailing how the same hack was actually much, much “worse than previously admitted.”)
And a campaign video yesterday:
She’s a fraud.
A new EU proposal could see millions of Britons face legal action for uploading photos of famous UK landmarks onto personal websites or even Facebook pages.
Monuments such as the Angel of the North and the London Eye, or public works of art such as Trafalgar Square’s Fourth Plinth or Liverpool’s Superlambananas, may need to be blacked out in holiday snaps to avoid breaching the copyright of individual architects or artists.
Members of the public would only be able to upload the uncensored photograph with prior consent from the author.
These are restrictions that already exist in some member states of the EU, including France, Belgium and Italy, but in an attempt to harmonise copyright law, Brussels could extend this to the UK as early as next month.
The UK, along with countries such as Spain and Germany, currently enjoys “freedom of panorama”, a provision in copyright law that allows people to publish photographs of modern buildings or public art installations and use any way they like without infringing copyright.
However, where this clause does not exist, restrictions extend even to educational, not-for-profit websites such as Wikipedia. The website’s page for the Atomium building in Belgium, for example, is illustrated by a silhouetted shot of the building, due to copyright restrictions.
The ‘S.T.EYE’ has a built-in indicator to detect infections such as chlamydia and syphilis, turning a different colour depending on the strain of bacteria present.
It is the brainchild Daanyaal Ali, 14, Muaz Nawaz, 13 and Chirag Shah, 14, pupils at Isaac Newton Academy in Ilford, Essex, who wanted to “make detecting harmful STIs safer than ever before” without the need for invasive tests.
You may think awkward post-coital silences are common enough as it is – but the group’s ingenuity has been recognised with an award, the TeenTech gong for best health innovation.
According to a new poll, by research company Gallup, the Pirate Party has the support of 34.1% of the nation. That is more than the combined support of the two parties that form Iceland’s coalition government, the Progressive Party (Framsóknarflokkurinn) and the Independence Party (Sjálfstæðisflokkurinn)
The Pirates received 5.1% of votes in the 2013 elections, meaning that support for the party has almost septupled in two years.
Here is what they stand for
The manual pushes aside the George W. Bush-era label of “unlawful enemy combatant” for al Qaeda and the like. The new term of choice: “unprivileged belligerent.”
An eye-catching section deals with a definition of journalists and how they are expected to stay out of the fight.
The manual defines them this way: “In general, journalists are civilians. However, journalists may be members of the armed forces, persons authorized to accompany the armed forces, or unprivileged belligerents.”
Lumping terrorist writers with bona fide scribes prompted one officer to call the paragraph “odd.” A civilian lawyer who opines on war crime cases called the wording “an odd and provocative thing for them to write.”
How well would the late Nobel-Prize-winning physicist Dr. Richard P. Feynman do in a technical interview at a software company?
It got me wondering, would someone like Jeb, or another candidate that’s been struggling like he has, hire a crowd? Pay people to attend their rallies to make them seem like they’re gaining in popularity? We have seen Hillary Clinton stage appearances, knowing ahead of time the people she’d interact with. Would a staged rally be out of the question for a struggling GOP candidate? According to “Crowds On Demand”, not at all.
Crowds on Demand is an American publicity firm. It claims to be the only “rent a crowd” service, providing its clients with the ability to hire actors to pose as fans.
It’s only a small step from Rent-a-Crowd to Rent-a-Vote..
Doctors have voted overwhelmingly to urge the Government to remove health and social care services from a controversial trade agreement between the EU and United States.
“Freedom of information requests of other countries which have entered into such agreements show exactly how damaging this treaty will be to both the social fabric and the health economy of this country,” he said.
“If there is anything resembling an NHS by the time this treaty is negotiated it won’t survive this treaty.
“The correct motion is to kill this treaty dead, not to tolerate it sneaking in and mugging us.”
Of course, people were quick to downplay the alarm. “It only listens when you say ‘Ok, Google’.” (Ok, so how does it know to start listening just before I’m about to say ‘Ok, Google?’) “It’s no big deal.” (A company stealth installs an audio listener that listens to every room in the world it can, and transmits audio data to the mothership when it encounters an unknown, possibly individually tailored, list of keywords – and it’s no big deal!?) “You can opt out. It’s in the Terms of Service.” (No. Just no. This is not something that is the slightest amount of permissible just because it’s hidden in legalese.) “It’s opt-in. It won’t really listen unless you check that box.” (Perhaps. We don’t know, Google just downloaded a black box onto my computer. And it may not be the same black box as was downloaded onto yours. )
At least 5,500 Coloradans crammed into a Denver gymnasium, an adjacent atrium, and lacrosse field Saturday night to hear presidential candidate and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders speak, in what is being reported as one of the biggest political rallies so far in the 2016 election cycle.
Saturday’s crowd is the latest sign that Sanders is proving a real challenge to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whose rally at New York City’s Roosevelt Island last week drew an estimated 5,500 people.
Platitudes are cheap. We’ve all heard organizations say they’re committed to “diversity” and “tolerance” without ever getting specific, so here’s our stance on it:
We welcome you.
We welcome people of any gender identity or expression, race, skin color, ethnicity, age, size, nationality, sexual orientation, ability level, neurotype, religion, elder status, family structure, culture, subculture, political opinion, education level, identity, and self-identification. We welcome activists, artists, bloggers, crafters, coders, wannabe-coders, designers, entrepreneurs, documentation writers, journalists, sysadmins, teachers, ordinary people, extraordinary people, and everyone in between.
We welcome you. You may wear a baby sling, hijab, a kippah, leather, an XXXL t-shirt, a pentacle, a political badge, a rainbow, a rosary, tattoos, or something we can only dream of. You may carry a guitar or walking cane or a 15 year old laptop. Conservative or liberal, libertarian or socialist — we believe it’s possible for people of all viewpoints and persuasions to come together and learn from each other. We believe in the broad spectrum of individual and collective experience and in the inherent dignity of all people. We believe that amazing things happen when people from different worlds and world-views approach each other to create a conversation.
We get excited about web development — from professional to amateur, from giant projects to simple apps, from the coder who’s been doing this since the day Django was conceived in Kansas to the newbie who just started studying the Django tutorial today.
We think accessibility for people with disabilities is a priority, not an afterthought. We think neurodiversity is a feature, not a bug. We believe in being inclusive, welcoming, and supportive of anyone who comes to us with good faith and the desire to build a community.
There are a few diversity initiatives in the Django community, but there can always be more. We protect our diversity through our Code of Conduct and the team that applies it. We also call on you, as a member of the Django community, to proudly show your support. Be generous, understanding and respectful to your fellow Djangonauts. Seek out newcomers and help them feel like they belong. Listen with empathy when someone has a different perspective. Talk to someone if you notice that something could be better.
We have enough experience to know that we won’t get any of this perfect on the first try. But we have enough hope, energy, and idealism to want to learn things we don’t know now. We may not be able to satisfy everyone, but we can certainly work to avoid excluding anyone. And we promise that if we get it wrong, we’ll listen carefully and respectfully to you when you point it out to us, and we’ll do our best to make good on our mistakes.
We think our technical experience is important, but we think our community experience is more important. We know what goes wrong when organizations say one thing and do another, or when they refuse to say anything at all. We believe that keeping the Django Software Foundation transparent is just as important as keeping our servers stable.
We work with the Django web framework, and we invite everyone to contribute, to the core Django code, the ecosystem of Django packages, and the community.
Come build the web with us.
The sneaky designers at Beats by Dre employ a clever trick to make you think that the company’s plastic headphones are durable products worth the premium price.
Beats by Dre headphones are garbage. Besides their crappy sound, they’re basically designed to break. And yet they sell millions of pairs of headphones. It’s practically a perfect business: Take crap and sell it for a fortune. How do they do it? In part it’s marketing, and you know, Dr. Dre. But there’s more.
Pembient, based in San Francisco uses keratin — a type of fibrous protein — and rhino DNA to produce a dried powder which is then 3D printed into synthetic rhino horns which is genetically and spectrographically similar to original rhino horns.The company plans to release a beer brewed with the synthetic horn later this year in the Chinese market.
The Chinese and Vietnamese rhino horn craze has caused an unprecedented surge in rhino poaching throughout Africa and Asia bringing the animal to the brink of extinction. In South Africa, home to 80 percent of Africa’s rhino population, 1,215 rhinos were killed in 2014.
Matthew Markus, CEO of Pembient says his company will sell rhino horns at one-eighth of the price of the original, undercutting the price poachers can get and forcing them out eventually.
A friend, Joseph Meek, 20, told the Daily News he had taken the .45 Glock away from Roof two weeks ago after Roof went on a drunken, bigoted rant about segregation and killing people.
“He said he was planning for about six months to do something crazy,” said Meek, who is white. “He wanted it to be segregated. He wanted it to be white with the white, black with the black. All the races segregated.
“He wanted to do something big, like the Trayvon Martin case,” said Meek, referring to the unarmed black teen gunned down in 2012 in Florida by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman. “He was upset about it. It made him mad.”
At this time, just about everybody knows he was simply a racist. So… what are the conservatives blaming?
Guns not allowed in church. (Bryan Fischer, Twitter)
Guns not allowed in church. (Steve Doocy, Fox News Channel)
Guns not allowed in church. (Mike Huckabee, Fox News Radio)
Rev. Clementa Pinckney voting against concealed carry of guns in churches. (Gun Owners of America communications director Erich Pratt, their website)
Rev. Clementa Pinckney voting against concealed carry of guns in churches. (NRA board member Charles Cotton, message board)
Over-medication. (Rick Perry, Newsmax)
Abortion. (Alveda King, Fox News Channel)
Hostility against Christians. (E.W. Jackson, Fox News Channel)
Hostility against Christians. (Lindsey Graham, The View)
Hatred of religious liberty. (Rick Santorum, radio interview)
Socialist race wars. (Alex Jones, InfoWars)
False flag. (David Knight, InfoWars)
“People not understanding where salvation comes from.” (Rand Paul, Campaign event)
Godlessness. (Steven Crowder, Louder with Crowder)
The Devil. (Rep. Mark Sanford, CNN)
The gays and Obama Anti-gay pastor and Fox News contributor E.W. Jackson
A North Carolina florist is being hailed a hero after alerting police when she spotted the suspected gunman Dylann Storm Roof’s car early on Thursday and then tailing him until authorities arrived.
“It was God who made this happen,” she said of the credit she received. “It don’t have nothing to do with Debbie. It don’t have nothing to do with Todd. It’s all about him.
1. Make Universe
2. Send White Supremacist to Church to shoot Black folks
3. Send women to tailgate the killer
4. Get credit
(well done Debbie!)
Bernie Sanders, presidential candidate and firebrand of the left, has a lot of respect for President Obama. But he believes the president made a major mistake after running “one of the great campaigns in American history”: He left his activist supporters behind.
“The biggest mistake that Barack Obama made” was essentially to tell his supporters, “Thank you very much for electing me, I’ll take it from here,” Senator Sanders told reporters at a Monitor-hosted breakfast Thursday. “I will not make that mistake.”
We are currently witnessing the start of a mass extinction event the likes of which have not been seen on Earth for at least 65 million years. This is the alarming finding of a new study published in the journal Science Advances.
The research was designed to determine how human actions over the past 500 years have affected the extinction rates of vertebrates: mammals, fish, birds, reptiles and amphibians. It found a clear signal of elevated species loss which has markedly accelerated over the past couple of hundred years, such that life on Earth is embarking on its sixth greatest extinction event in its 3.5 billion year history.
Contrary to the claim that a majority of Americans consent to discounts because the commercial benefits are worth the costs, our study suggests a new explanation for what has thus far been misconstrued as “tradeoff” behavior in the digital world: a large pool of Americans feel resigned to the inevitability of surveillance and the power of marketers to harvest their data. People who are resigned do not predictably decide to give up their data. We actually found no statistical relationship between being resigned to marketers’ use of data and accepting or rejecting various kinds of supermarket discounts. Rather, the larger percentages of people in the population who are resigned compared to people who believe in principle that tradeoffs are a fair deal indicate that in the real world people who give up their data are more likely to do it while resigned rather than as the result of cost-benefit analysis. Marketers would have all these behaviors categorized as a rational acceptance of tradeoffs. But when we looked in our scenario at the people who agreed to give up their data for supermarket discounts, we found that 57% of those who took the deal were resigned, while even using the broader understanding of tradeoff support only 32% were “tradeoff” supporters.
Reading the paper I don’t think they captured an accurate and honest assessment of public sentiment concerning the service/privacy trade off. Some of the questions are too leading, and basing a privacy research paper off “we conducted a representative national cell phone and wire line phone survey of 1,506 Americans age 18 and older who use the internet or email at least occasionally.” is naive.