Funny to Me Headlines

[abbey1227]

Shrinking lake revealing secrets — dead bodies

In the past week, two sets of human remains have been discovered in Lake Mead, which due to an ongoing drought has dropped to 30% of its capacity.

Experts believe more will emerge »


=========================================================


Thank God for all the experts.

[merh]

May 11, 2022 6:54:51 GMT abbey1227 said:

Shrinking lake revealing secrets — dead bodies

In the past week, two sets of human remains have been discovered in Lake Mead, which due to an ongoing drought has dropped to 30% of its capacity.

Experts believe more will emerge »


=========================================================


Thank God for all the experts.

10 pm news suggested local mafia

[merh]

[merh]

Remember jeans with pre-worn holes?


Nothing is new, is it?
The rich pretending to be working class.

[abbey1227]

May 11, 2022 18:15:43 GMT merh said:

Except it's against the law and the little prick knows it.

He would not like me protesting outside his home, I can pretty much guarantee that.

[abbey1227]

May 11, 2022 19:32:37 GMT merh said:

Remember jeans with pre-worn holes?


Nothing is new, is it?
The rich pretending to be working class.

Derelicte!!!!

[merh]

May 12, 2022 1:01:26 GMT abbey1227 said:

May 11, 2022 18:15:43 GMT merh said:

Except it's against the law and the little prick knows it.

He would not like me protesting outside his home, I can pretty much guarantee that.

If it were against the law, do you think he wouldn't block them?

Didn't read that libertarian lawyer article?

The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent

About The Volokh Conspiracy
FREE SPEECH

Protests Outside People's Homes (Residential Picketing) and the First Amendment
They can be banned, so long as the ban is content-neutral, and so long as people remain free to generally march through the neighborhood (as opposed to protesting right outside the target's home).
EUGENE VOLOKH | 8.15.2020 4:44 PM

We've heard a good deal in recent years about demonstrations outside people's homes. Is this sort of targeted residential picketing protected by the First Amendment?

The short answer: No, but any restrictions on such picketing have to be imposed through content-neutral statutes or ordinances (or, in some situations, injunctions); and they have to leave people free to demonstrate in the same neighborhood:

In Carey v. Brown (1980), the Court struck down a ban on residential picketing that had an exemption for labor picketing.
In Frisby v. Schultz (1988), the Court upheld a ban that had no exemption, because it was content-neutral and narrowly tailored to serving an important interest in protecting residential privacy, and because "General marching through residential neighborhoods, or even walking a route in front of an entire block of houses" remained allowed.
In Madsen v. Women's Health Center, Inc. (1994), the Court struck down an injunction that barred residential picketing within 300 feet of clinic employees' homes, because it was too broad.
Carey involved a pro-busing group picketing the home of a mayor, while Frisby and Madsen involved anti-abortion groups picketing the homes of clinic employees. Indeed, most of the residential picketing cases I've seen have involved anti-abortion protesters; at least in the 1980s and 1990s, such residential picketing seemed to be a favored tactic of at least some parts of that movement.

But the Court of course didn't draw distinctions based on the content of the speech or based on whether the picketing was aimed at a public official. For instance, Justice Scalia, who had often faulted the Court in free speech cases where he thought anti-abortion speech was being treated unfairly, was in the majority in Frisby; Justices Brennan and Marshall, strong supporters of abortion rights, dissented; none of them seemed swayed by the speakers' ideology. Rather, as I note above, the Court expressly forbade such distinctions.

So a city or a state could ban picketing or allow it. But the rules would apply equally to anti-racism protesters, antifa protesters, anti-abortion protesters, alt.right protesters, and any other protesters.

To my knowledge, residential picketing is banned on a statewide basis only in Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, and Minnesota, though the statutes operate somewhat differently. (The Arizona ban is limited to picketing conducted "with intent to harass, annoy or alarm"; the Minnesota law allows injunctions to be issued based on targeted residential picketing that happens "on more than one occasion," rather than banning such picketing outright.) But various cities ban it as well.


Finally, even when there is no ordinance banning residential picketing, particular kinds of behavior while picketing—especially loud noise at night (cf. the Washington protest outside the Postmaster General's home)—may be banned by content-neutral restrictions. See Kovacs v. Cooper (1949). Of course, those restrictions must be enforced in a content-neutral manner as well: A city can't deliberately ignore loud protests that express certain views but then punish loud protests that ignore others.

reason.com/volokh/2020/08/15/protests-outside-peoples-homes-residential-picketing-and-the-first-amendment/

It HAS to be banned in terms that don't apply to a specific type of protest.
MOST STATES haven't done it.

Why?
Would you be threatening his life?
THAT is illegal.

Just like you love the 2nd Amendment, the one ahead of it says 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So as long as it is peaceful, it is allowed unless the state has a local ordinance against protesting in people's residential areas.

[abbey1227]

May 12, 2022 11:33:38 GMT merh said:

Why?
Would you be threatening his life?
THAT is illegal.

Just like you love the 2nd Amendment, the one ahead of it says 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So as long as it is peaceful, it is allowed unless the state has a local ordinance against protesting in people's residential areas.

There are many places to peaceably assemble and get all the attention you want.........without annoying the heck out of others.

Weird how some people have to get permits and such.........but all these leftist protests can just do whatever and whenever? 

That's just it, merh.........it's a residential area. Not the place for protests, imo .........neither are highways and roadways.

[merh]

May 12, 2022 12:26:54 GMT abbey1227 said:

May 12, 2022 11:33:38 GMT merh said:

Why?
Would you be threatening his life?
THAT is illegal.

Just like you love the 2nd Amendment, the one ahead of it says 

So as long as it is peaceful, it is allowed unless the state has a local ordinance against protesting in people's residential areas.

There are many places to peaceably assemble and get all the attention you want.........without annoying the heck out of others.

Weird how some people have to get permits and such.........but all these leftist protests can just do whatever and whenever? 

That's just it, merh.........it's a residential area. Not the place for protests, imo .........neither are highways and roadways.

I think homes should be off limits, but it was those pesky pro-lifers picketing abortion clinic workers who really spread the idea

[abbey1227]

May 13, 2022 0:16:47 GMT merh said:

May 12, 2022 12:26:54 GMT abbey1227 said:

There are many places to peaceably assemble and get all the attention you want.........without annoying the heck out of others.

Weird how some people have to get permits and such.........but all these leftist protests can just do whatever and whenever? 

That's just it, merh.........it's a residential area. Not the place for protests, imo .........neither are highways and roadways.

I think homes should be off limits, but it was those pesky pro-lifers picketing abortion clinic workers who really spread the idea

I never agreed with them either

[abbey1227]

Health
Yahoo Life
Yep, trans men can get pregnant. Why Calvin Klein's ad depicting a trans family is causing a stir.

=================================================================


So in other words.........biological women can still get pregnant? Thanks for clearing that up

[abbey1227]

here's a good grouping of 3 Yahoo headlines...........

Sources: Mom kept jumping on kids before they died

'We will not go back': Stars sign Planned Parenthood ad

Dire warning from leading medical journal on abortion

[merh]

May 14, 2022 2:35:47 GMT abbey1227 said:

here's a good grouping of 3 Yahoo headlines...........

Sources: Mom kept jumping on kids before they died

'We will not go back': Stars sign Planned Parenthood ad

Dire warning from leading medical journal on abortion

Wow.

Imagine some women aren't made to be mothers!
Or need to stop at one or 2!

Every child a wanted child

[abbey1227]

May 14, 2022 3:00:53 GMT merh said:

Wow.

Imagine some women aren't made to be mothers!
Or need to stop at one or 2!

Every child a wanted child

Or prevented before any arrive. 

[merh]

May 14, 2022 11:27:06 GMT abbey1227 said:

May 14, 2022 3:00:53 GMT merh said:

Wow.

Imagine some women aren't made to be mothers!
Or need to stop at one or 2!

Every child a wanted child

Or prevented before any arrive. 

Isn't that the point of that Planned Parenthood ad line?
If one doesn't want another child, use birth control or abort it.

Every child a wanted child was the line PP used when I was getting their services around 1980.

theconversation.com/abortion-has-been-common-in-the-us-since-the-18th-century-and-debate-over-it-started-soon-after-182496

From unregulated to criminalized

From the nation’s founding through the early 1800s, pre-quickening abortions – that is, abortions before a pregnant person feels fetal movement – were fairly common and even advertised.

Women from various backgrounds sought to end unwanted pregnancies before and during this period both in the U.S. and across the world. For example, enslaved black women in the U.S. developed abortifacients – drugs that induce abortions – and abortion practices as means to stop pregnancies after rapes by, and coerced sexual encounters with, white male slave owners.

In the mid- to late-1800s, an increasing number of states passed anti-abortion laws sparked by both moral and safety concerns. Primarily motivated by fears about high risks for injury or death, medical practitioners in particular led the charge for anti-abortion laws during this era.

By 1860, the American Medical Association sought to end legal abortion. The Comstock Law of 1873 criminalized attaining, producing or publishing information about contraception, sexually transmitted infections and diseases, and how to procure an abortion.

A spike in fears about new immigrants and newly emancipated black people reproducing at higher rates than the white population also prompted more opposition to legal abortion.

So abortion was allowed & a capitalist enterprise until doctors wanted more of a piece of it & fears of white Americans getting diluted by immigrants-this would be the Irish & Italians around then, right?-wanted to block abortions of white Americans.

[abbey1227]

May 14, 2022 17:39:08 GMT merh said:

Isn't that the point of that Planned Parenthood ad line?
If one doesn't want another child, use birth control or abort it.

Every child a wanted child was the line PP used when I was getting their services around 1980.

A spike in fears about new immigrants and newly emancipated black people reproducing at higher rates than the white population also prompted more opposition to legal abortion.

So abortion was allowed & a capitalist enterprise until doctors wanted more of a piece of it & fears of white Americans getting diluted by immigrants-this would be the Irish & Italians around then, right?-wanted to block abortions of white Americans.

That is the point........and the part of the discussion I totally agree with. NOBODY should be forced to have or care for a child they do not want. You gonna give men that 100% pass, too?

I am all too aware of just how expensive children can be these days and a person for sure is impeding their own wealth generation should they start too soon or have too many.

I find that an odd assertion.........like just ONE MORE WAY for the left to insert racism into the discussion. BUT wasn't Margaret Sanger originally pushing abortion as a means of controlling the black population because she WAS a racist?

And where the F is the word 'disproportionately' when it comes to the percentage of abortions with black and brown people? Suspiciously ignored.

See how funny that is today? Those Irish and Italians are now usually viewed as whites.    That's oddly funny when you think about it.

Like many a subject.......it's the mingling that'll solve a lot of this nonsense hopefully. I used to always say those anti-Gay types were bound to end up with a gay child or grandchild......and then that'd shut them up.

The same should be true for racist types, as well. With DNA tests widely available now, it should be obvious to most there is a wide majority of 'mixed' family history for most people. So they can give up that moronic viewpoint, too.

[abbey1227]

thehill.com
Britney Spears says she’s lost ‘miracle baby’ a month after pregnancy announcement
Spears said that during her conservatorship she was forced to use an IUD to prevent her from having more children.

=============================================================



so because she wanted it, it's a baby? Interesting distinction people make.

[merh]

May 15, 2022 1:31:59 GMT abbey1227 said:

May 14, 2022 17:39:08 GMT merh said:

Isn't that the point of that Planned Parenthood ad line?
If one doesn't want another child, use birth control or abort it.

Every child a wanted child was the line PP used when I was getting their services around 1980.


So abortion was allowed & a capitalist enterprise until doctors wanted more of a piece of it & fears of white Americans getting diluted by immigrants-this would be the Irish & Italians around then, right?-wanted to block abortions of white Americans.

That is the point........and the part of the discussion I totally agree with. NOBODY should be forced to have or care for a child they do not want. You gonna give men that 100% pass, too?

I am all too aware of just how expensive children can be these days and a person for sure is impeding their own wealth generation should they start too soon or have too many.

I find that an odd assertion.........like just ONE MORE WAY for the left to insert racism into the discussion. BUT wasn't Margaret Sanger originally pushing abortion as a means of controlling the black population because she WAS a racist?

And where the F is the word 'disproportionately' when it comes to the percentage of abortions with black and brown people? Suspiciously ignored.

See how funny that is today? Those Irish and Italians are now usually viewed as whites.    That's oddly funny when you think about it.

Like many a subject.......it's the mingling that'll solve a lot of this nonsense hopefully. I used to always say those anti-Gay types were bound to end up with a gay child or grandchild......and then that'd shut them up.

The same should be true for racist types, as well. With DNA tests widely available now, it should be obvious to most there is a wide majority of 'mixed' family history for most people. So they can give up that moronic viewpoint, too.

Margaret Higgins Sanger (born Margaret Louise Higgins; September 14, 1879 – September 6, 1966)

So she wouldn't have been much of a voice before 1899.
The push to make abortion illegal came before she was born.  But go ahead & blame her. Maybe she was just voicing what she heard? The common argument of the day?

The discussion is about abortion existing back when America was starting up. It WAS allowed. It was made illegal around 150 yrs ago. You know, when blacks were being emancipated & thus part of the free population & not farm product.

Yet they don't give up the racist crap. 

I have nothing but Euro in my background according to the blood bank.

Genetic ancestry
Northern and Central Europe100%

Such as Ireland, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Scandinavia, and parts of eastern Europe

[merh]

We are so doomed

[merh]