swansont

Their stated goal was adding justices that would eliminate Roe, Obergfell, and likely Griswold. Seems likely that they sufficiently vetted their choices regarding matters like this, especially since they all fall under an umbrella of non-enumerated rights.

To my mind we have continually missed with our estimation about how low the GOP will go. Contraception and same-sex marriage are next. How do we know this? Because they told us. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/2016-republican-party-platform See also https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/jackson-supreme-court-roe-republicans-griswold-loving

Overturning Roe was something that supposedly had no basis in reality, either. Obstacle doesn't have to be real to have a perception of being real, and keep people from traveling.

Your ultra-religious cousin rats you out. The governor sets up checkpoints (gosh, would a governor set up needless checkpoints at their border?) and the police intimidate people, who aren't aware of their right to remain silent. Whatever. Does it really matter? What does this matter if SCOTUS is hell-bent on one course of action?

All drugs are potentially harmful. It just depends on the dose. People have died from drinking too much water. An inherent harmful/not harmful demarcation doesn't exist.

The people that are impacted probably don't care so much if/that fewer people are impacted. If they make it illegal to travel to get an abortion, or to assist in this way (such as with the Texas law civil statute) then this can't be circumvented.

The crux will be of this will get people to vote for democrats who would never vote democrat because the've been quite effectively demonized by the right (vilified for things they have not done, and not done even when holding enough seats to do so (see e.g. they will take your guns!), unlike the GOP, who have done many things the left complained about, and have promised to do more) and also getting people to vote who would not otherwise have voted.

In any kind of representative government, where consent of the governed is present, it's a matter of enough of the populace wanting it to be legal.

In ~half the states they won't. Many of them already have laws lined up to severely curtail the right, if not eliminate it completely.

https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/116044-math-test/ Scroll down for the latest info

The creator you have hypothesized (aka God). Who, in order to have done what they allegedly did, must be more intelligent than you. You don't know their intent, but instead have determined that it's a flaw because it doesn't suit you, or make sense to you. This is why I mentioned hubris earlier, to assume that something is a flaw and not a feature, and observed that your desires aren't being catered to.

Tidal streams are not out on the ocean, which is what you originally referenced.

And how do you know it was a mistake rather than the intent, and you just can't understand the intent?

Those are images that have been uploaded, rather than LaTex in the post there are hints here https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/116044-math-test/

It's simply not possible to make something perfect for everyone if they have differing likes and dislikes. So that can't be the metric by which one judges there to be a flaw.

We're a science site. A scientific theory is rather more than ideas used to explain something. It also involves testing the idea and having it be falsifiable.

You're only viewing this from one perspective and there are many. You have likes and dislikes that differ from at least some other people, so what is nice for you is not nice for someone else.

Which is atypical and I'm betting that's not out on the ocean.

Kittenpuncher has been banned after repeated abusive posts, with no sign of improvement

They’re a good fraction of meter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_tide

Makes no sense to you. There’s a certain amount of hubris in thinking that it should make sense to you.

So it’s about you, not the creator. Why do you think the universe was created with you in mind? Yeah, stop with that. If you didn’t post it, it doesn’t count. As you already acknowledged.

Define “perfect” and from whose perspective this is defined. Also explain why this perfection is the standard.

! Moderator Note Anything you wish to discuss needs to be posted here

! Moderator Note No, we will not aid in the description of illegal acts.