I totally understand what she’s saying. What I don’t understand is how three people can possibly disagree with this. This doesn’t seem to be a subjective matter at all.

Barrett wrote. “This Court’s standing doctrine prevents us from ‘exercis[ing such] general legal oversight’ of the other branches of Government.”

Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented.

How is it possible that “the court’s standing doctrine prevents” them from doing something yet three justices dissent? Is the “standing doctrine” not the “law”?

republicans don’t base their opinions on reality, and Dems do

To be fair, a lot of liberals inflate reality too. Usually it’s to overcompensate for “history”, less than today’s reality. It can be a bit much.

And I wouldn’t say Republicans have opinions so much as they follow cult leaders. An opinion is usually something based on things you know rather than what you’ve been tricked into saying.

The United States is doomed.

We care more about engaging with content that spikes our brain chemicals than we care about facts and reality. So many people have been duped to believe and promote things that are verifiably false for the benefit of corporate interests and the fragile ego of you-know-who.

This article is genuinely terrifying. It confirms that half of Americans believe statements that have been proven to be lies. That’s a lot of people being hoodwinked. That’s a lot of people convinced they should cast a vote to hurt themselves for the benefit of one person who has never done a thing to help them. It honestly breaks my heart.

It shows me options to purchase. Season 1 is $20 from Amazon.

Does this work where you live? https://www.justwatch.com/us/search?q=Chuck

Absolutely. Apple, Amazon, Google, Vudu, Movies Anywhere (off the top of my head).

What I recently learned is that some physical discs will come with download codes that can be used, once, on any of these services. I was gifted the Alien box set which was nice but I don’t have a Blu-ray player. The code allowed me to add the films to my iTunes account.

Now, how long I can watch those movies until a license runs out is another question. I’ve yet to find a way to download a movie to disc for backup. Because, technically, you don’t buy a movie, you buy the license to watch it. This is even the case for physical discs.

You’re going to need to be more specific. What movie are you looking for and on what platform?

My initial reason for not having kids was financial. I think a lot of people have learned it may be better to have children later in life when you can properly care for them. I know many people who’ve had their first child in their late-30s and early-40s. My aunt had her first child in her fifties. That’s not something that was common before modern medicine.

I have always had the idea that I would have a kid if and when I met the right person to share parenting with. That hasn’t happened so I’ve had to put some thought into my priorities. It’s not fair to have a child just because it’s what society says you should do or just because you want someone to take care of you when you’re old. It’s so much more than that and I think people should be more mindful of the responsibilities and long term repercussions.

I offered two reasons I personally may regret not having children. I could list several others such as the pure joy of watching them grow into adults and mimic you and your partner. If you want to say that’s selfish, to bring another human into the word to experience a universe of emotion you’d otherwise never experience, I understand that perspective. No argument.

But then I offered that choosing to prioritize your own life is in and of itself a selfish act. It’s more explicitly about you than it is about another person.

Would you disagree that going out to eat by yourself is more of a selfish act than inviting a friend to eat out with you? Sharing an experience is less selfish, no?

That argument makes sense. Though I see it more from choosing to prioritize yourself and own self interests over having children and sharing a life with them as selfish too. I guess we’re all selfish one way or another.

I’m not sure you’re going to get an objective answer to this as no one has lived a life of either having kids or not having kids, hungrythirstyhorny.

I will say that, as a single male in his mid forties who has observed a good amount of life; first, the thought of not having people to rely on in you’re old age is a little worrisome; and two, not having had someone to pass my knowledge and skills down to is a little sad. However, I really enjoy the freedom and opportunities my life (and bank account) affords me.

There is always a cost to freedom. Or, as Jonis Joplin put it - freedom’s just another word for nothin’ left to lose. Choosing to not have children is a selfish act. Whether “selfish” is a bad thing or not is subjective.

I would offer that anyone who’s going through life without children, find some altruistic outlet to participate in. You can otherwise find yourself wondering what your legacy may be or what the point of your life has been - aka a mid-life crisis.

What people often leave out of this is that it only applied to broadcast publicly available television. It did not pertain to subscription cable tv which is why it was deemed unfair to local stations leading to its demise.

Considering this and other “public” versus “paid” examples in commerce and welfare, it says a lot about our culture. We care more about our freedom to spend money than we care about the general welfare of the population. We Americans want the freedom to be “bad” people (for lack of a better term) while rejecting a government that would promote our wellness and prosperity.

This is because our federal guidelines (aka The Constitution) merely outline the root level philosophies and leaves the majority of government responsibilities to the states. And in a time when borders are nearly meaningless in an always instantly connected world, beginning with nationally distributed cable television channels, a lot of people are ignorant to their own state’s legislation and power of their local representatives and own voices.

This country has changed a lot in 250 years. The old rules and guidelines are failing us. The death of the Fairness Doctrine wasn’t unfair, so to speak, but there’s a desperate need for new legislation that does the same on a national level. That’s never going to happen because the federal government can’t limit the “free speech” of entities people have to pay for to gain access to.

I would guess that anything that requires an account to gain access to it, even just an email log in or ISP / cellular subscription, skirts around the same rules that apply to free over the air television. To reiterate, we want the freedom to pay to be lied to. And our Constitution grants us that right.

I’m just now realizing that one industry that may benefit most from humans being replaced by robots is law enforcement. Teaching AI empathy and rational reasoning may be easier than teaching humans all the laws and how to let go of their bigotries.

That’s because of the need for an ally / military presence in the middle east. It has nothing to do with Gaza.

I’m of the opinion that an individual with the explicit intent to commit genocide is the main obstacle, regardless of who is supporting them.

This is of course entirely accurate. If you’ve lost your mind and forgotten who Netanyahu is.

But you haven’t because you say, “Biden refuses to use his leverage, even though he has admitted in an interview that it was “reasonable” to conclude that Netanyahu is prolonging the war for his own political benefit.”

Joe Biden is an enabler but the US is not “the main obstacle to peace in Palestine”.

You’re not helping to describe the use of “would” by adding extra words to negate the intent. “I would, but I won’t” is two statements. You’ve instead described the use of the word “but”.

Would: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/would
• a simple past tense and past participle of will
• used to express an intention or inclination
• used to express an uncertainty
• used in conditional sentences to express choice or possibility

Could: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/could
• a simple past tense of can
• used to express possibility
• used to express conditional possibility or ability
• used in asking for permission

Would / will is used when something is possible but you’re not sure.
Could / can is used when you’re not sure if something is possible. –