zapatos

Like @Peterkin I'd have to also answer 'no' to this one. "Bring mankind together in friendship as well as competition" is very poetic but is a bit of a stretch. A person may find friendship and competition in sport, but the rest of 'mankind' is left out of the picture. I've never found a 'friend in sport' due to someone else competing in the Olympics.

https://news.yahoo.com/rights-violence-problem-184823155.html

While my philosophy class in college bored me to tears, I think everyone would benefit from studying philosophy for ethics, logic, how to critically discuss, and how to argue rationally. I think philosophy gets a bad rap due to its previous position in the 'sciences'.

He was joking.

Again, the fact that women have won olympic medals is not evidence that women can race horses as well as men. I always have high hopes when I start to converse with you and it inevitably leads to disappointment. You always seem to ruin your knowledgeable posts by your refusal to back off one inch from anything you've said, even when it is clear you've misstated some minor thing. You and Trump have that in common. My fault for falling into the old trap.

No. I didn't ask that.

Women have been playing basketball for as long as men. That doesn't mean they are equal to men in that sport. This entire discussion has to do with whether or not men and women are equals as jockeys. Simply stating that women have been racing for 100 years tells us absolutely nothing about their ability to compete against men. I can't believe you are trying to pass that off as evidence that they can compete as equals against men.

Being around for a century doesn't mean they can perform as well as men though. I assume you meant that as an add-on to your answer to my question.

So, sounds like a woman who trains to be a jockey should be able to meet all the physical needs to ride a horse in a race as well as a man. Is that right?

Hydraulic fracturing causes small earth quakes, even up to magnitude 4, and the wastewater disposal from fracking caused a magnitude 5.8 earthquake. https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/does-production-oil-and-gas-shales-cause-earthquakes-if-so-how-are-earthquakes-related-these Makes me wonder if tides could indeed affect tectonics.

I assumed you meant strength because you said the sport was very "physical", which is where the males would have the advantage. Height and speed advantages of men shouldn't come into play so I didn't know what other "physical" advantages men had over women other than strength. Other than keeping your body in the best possible position on the horse I cannot think (but don't know as I'm not a rider) where significant strength is required. As the horse is not trying to buck them off it seems likely to me that a rider's strength is not maxed out at any time. I'd certainly be happy to be proved incorrect as this conversation is just an interesting discussion for me.

Sorry if I missed it, but what part of riding the horse in a race do you assume the extra strength of males over females comes into play? The article you linked to talked a lot about the jockey moving well on the horse to help the forward motion, but I didn't see anything (in that article, anyway) about the need for extra strength.

Wasn't the monster named Abby someone?

AFAIK, seeds will not germinate without water (along with the right temperature and sometimes other factors).

It struck me the same way. Back in 4th grade we sprouted seeds on wet paper towels. They also started to look bad after a while.

I understand your position. Society though does not wish opioids to be legal, and there are a limited number of people who wish to make safe spaces legal. Those who do wish safe spaces to be legal are simply being realistic. They know people will do illegal drugs and are simply trying to mitigate the risk that addiction poses to their friends and family. I have had several family members who were addicted to various drugs. No one wanted them to quit doing drugs more than they themselves. I would have allowed them to do drugs in my house if it meant they had a better chance of surviving long enough to finally kick the habit. One of them only lived because his mother was able to get a dose of naloxone for him, no questions asked. I'm not saying your position is not valid, but if your goal is risk reduction, then safe places are a solution that achieves that goal.

We instituted a version of a safe zone in my household when my children were too young to drink. Coming home drunk was a violation of our rules, but if my kids were out with the car and under the influence, they could call home for a ride, 24 hours a day, with zero retribution for drinking. I was willing to accept law breaking and rule breaking if it meant saving them from harm. I suspect people who aren't willing to accept safe zones for drug use among strangers will usually feel differently if it is a loved one whose life is at risk.

Or it can be struck down when a state law conflicts with a federal law. Agreed.

It is both law and decision. When a court makes a decision, that decision becomes part of the body of unwritten laws known as common law.

Well, except for recreational use of marijruhanna in 18 states and Washington D.C., even though it is still illegal at the federal level.

The unenumerated Rights exist because the 9th Amendment say they do. They are just not named. It was left to SCOTUS to make these unenumerated rights explicit as the question of them comes up. Rather forward thinking of the Founders. Once the right is enumerated by SCOTUS it is binding on all other courts as if it had been explicitly written into the Constitution. The Supreme Court has the right to overturn their own ruling of the precedent that enumerated that Right, but unless and until they do, the Right (such as the Right to an abortion) exists due to the Supreme Court decision. I don't believe that is circular reasoning. Ignoring stare decisis should not be taken lightly, and should only be done if the original ruling's egregiousness surpasses an undefined threshold. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stare_decisis.asp

You can also hope that on the way down a plenary indulgence is being granted on your behalf! (12 years of Catholic School)

Haha. Good jokes travel fast!

Putin dies and goes to hell, but after a while, he is given a day off for good behavior. So he goes to Moscow, enters a bar, orders a drink, and asks the bartender: -Is Crimea ours? -Yes, it is. -And the Donbas? -Also ours. -And Kyiv? -We got that too. Satisfied, Putin drinks, and asks: -Thanks, how much do I owe you? -5 euros.