WDSmart

These charges have only been postponed, not dismissed. In the worst case, they will have to sit dormant for four years until a new president is inaugurated. After that, these charges can be reopened, and the trials and sentencing can continue.

I'm pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli as far as the conflict over their territories goes. As long as the wearing of the Palestinian flag colors by the BBC is just an ENCOURAGEMENT, I see nothing wrong with this. If, however, there is some attempt to PERSUADE or ORDER their employees to wear these colors, I am against it. Employees should be allowed to express their own political opinions on matters like these but should not be compelled to do anything like this by their employers.

No, I don't have any links on this aspect, and there are many aspects of this that puzzle me. Some of those are the terms. Does "trans women" mean people classified as men at birth who now identify as being women, or does "trans women" mean people who are classified as women at birth but who now identify as being men? And is there a term "trans man" for the opposite of whatever a "trans women" is? Also, you bring up a good issue. It seems like there is pressure for the "trans" of male-to-female types to be prohibited from participating in women's sports, but neither "trans," female-to-male, nor male-to-female, is prohibited (as far as I know) from participating in men's sports. I know men are prohibited from participating in women's sports, but are women prohibited from participating in men's sports? I think not because I've seen female golfers participate in men's sports. Doesn't that gender prohibition go both ways? If the answer is no, why not?

My point is that it wasn't that long ago that Blacks were discriminated against in many aspects of society, including the ability to play on sports teams, go to school, or share the same drinking fountains with Whites. Now, it is suggested that trans-gender athletes of both sexes should be discriminated against and banned from competing with cisgender (a term for people who identify with the gender they were assigned at birth A Guide To Gender Identity Terms | NPR Illinois) people. How long do we have to wait until those prejudices disappear, or at least their enforcement is prohibited by law?

Lock him up!

They cannot play in the game But what if someone is Black? Can they play? If you answer yes, what's the difference?

I agree with your last statement, but what about people who are born with both physical and psychological aspects of both genders?

"Adam and Eve" are only a legend. They never existed. Everyone has physical and psychological attributes that range from very dominantly male to dominantly female. This range is very much focused on each end, but there are those that exist somewhere in the middle. And, reproduction is not a subject important to this Forum's topic.

I am a far-left liberal and would be considered "woke" by most right-wing conservatives. I do, however, support HBO's decision to continue to be associated with J.K. Rowlings. Being "woke," I am fervently in favor of the 1st Amendment's right to free speech, and that goes for all artist's works. They can express their opinion with their art, and we can then either enjoy their art or choose not to read, listen to, or buy their art.

I agree, but what do we do about people who don't have only xx or xy chromosomes? Some (only 2 in 1,000) are born with XXY, a mix of chromosomes. Klinefelter Syndrome: What It Is, Symptoms & Treatment

That's democracy for you.............. That's not a democracy. That's a democratic republic.

You're right! If you define "losers" as the voters who did not vote for Trump, they actually are in the majority, about 50.2%. Trump did not win the majority of the popular vote, only about 49.8%, but those votes were in states that allowed him to easily win the Electoral College vote, which elects the president.

I'm among the two out of five adults then...

Yes, I agree. Trump DID NOT GET a majority of the popular vote. The last I saw, it was 49% something. He did win the Electoral College by a large majority, but not the popular vote. There were more people that voted for someone else besides Trump than voted for him.

I understand the controversy, but I think the gender requirements for being on a certain type of team in college (and other types of) sports need to be updated. Limiting it to just "male" or "female" doesn't cut it anymore.

Thanks for your response. Yes, I've begun taking a short nap (1 to 2 hours) after eating lunch. And, yes, I do believe it has something to do with my sleep. When I sleep at night, I dream a lot or think about things I'm working on. This goes on for what seems like an hour, but then when I get up, I've "slept" for 4 hours or so, so it just wasn't a very deep sleep. Do you have any remedies, including medications, that you would recommend? Thanks again...

And so the destruction of the USA's economy begins...

I'll be 79 in January. Physically, I'm okay, but I have experienced a change in my awareness level over the past two months. Often, I feel like I'm half-asleep and groggy, and that affects my balance a little. I can think well, but often, it seems like I'm in a dream world. I've gone to several different doctors multiple times and received some medications, but none of them seem to help much. I'm due to go back again in mid-December. I live in northeastern Thailand in the mountains near a relatively small city, so the doctors I have access to are probably not the best for treating symptoms like mine. If I don't see an improvement by the first of the year, I'm thinking about going to Bangkok to a hospital that specializes in treating symptoms like mine for a complete checkup, diagnosis, and treatment.

I'm not a UK citizen, but I support Starmer on this one.

There have been several that were classified as "democratic socialism." "The most notable historical examples are the Paris Commune, the various soviet republics established in the post-World War I period, early Soviet Russia before the abolition of soviet councils by the Bolsheviks, Revolutionary Catalonia as noted by George Orwell, and the Federation of Rojava in Northern Syria. Other examples include the kibbutz communities in modern-day Israel, Marinaleda in Spain, the Zapatistas of EZLN in the region of Chiapas, and to some extent, the workers' self-management policies within the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Cuba. However, the best-known example is Chile under President Salvador Allende, who was overthrown in a military coup funded and backed by the CIA in 1973." Democratic socialism - Wikipedia Thanks for asking...

I believe everything you say above is true. What you haven't said is what type of government it is that owns the means of production. Most people believe a socialist government has to be authoritarian. What I've been saying is that socialism, just as you've described above, can exist under a variety of forms of government including a democracy and a representative democracy. What you've left out is that the government, whatever type it is, then provides for the needs of all the people in the society. I was always taught and continue to repeat this short phrase, which is a simple description of socialism: "From each according to their abilities. To each according to their needs."

Socialism doesn't incite weakness. It promotes sharing. Freedom is not the ultimate expression of capitalism. Selfishness is the ultimate expression of capitalism.

I started my comment proceeding this one by stating I didn't know what you meant by "self ownership." I thank you for your explanation above explaining your use of that term. It's basically selfishness - putting your desires above the community's needs and best interests. And, yes, you're right. That is the opposite of socialism. The USA is now a republic of fifty states under the constitution you describe above. This does not annoy the left (or at least me). What annoys me is the right's (people like you?) decision of what constitutional rights are versus what can be legislated individually by each state. Your example is a good one. How is DEI Hire a violation of constitutional rights and not a law that can be legislated by a state? It's not the Constitution that is thought to be "in the way of progress" by the left. It's the right's interpretation of the Constitution that is in the way of progress. But, of course, that is one of the major differences between liberals who are open to and promote change and conservatives who are against change. An example is "Make America Great Again" vs. "Make America Greater." If businesses are leaving states that favor DEI Hire, it is because they want the right to ensure their workforce is populated mainly with superior people - straight White males. Socialism is for the strong and accepting. A good example of socialism is how most people envision an ideal family. Some in the family contribute more than others. Some don't contribute much or are even a burden, like a child who is retarded or crippled. But all are given as much as the family can give. "From each according to ability. To each according to need," Capitalism is just the Law of the Jungle. The rich get rich, and the poor get poorer. People who are a burden are ignored and cast out. I do agree with your last sentence, "Self ownership is the epitome of capitalism and self expression which is at 180 degree odds of socialism." Sharing, using self expression, is the epitome of socialism.

Public services are socialist aspects of any society. I don't consider taxes specifically socialistic, but they are a way to fund the government. In a true socialistic society, there would be no taxes because there would be no wages paid. People would just work at what they felt was best for the society ("from each according to ability). Socialism existed long ago. It was the way humans (and many other animals) have lived together since time began. The terms "socialism," "capitalism," and "authoritarianism" were created long after that, but even those terms have existed in the English language for centuries. Most all "murderous, hate-ridden dictatorships" were not socialistic or communistic. Many claimed to be, but they were not. Most of these were plutocracies and tried to gather all the wealth of the country into a few people at the top of their authoritarianistic governments). Socialism and communism do not "divide the world into Exploiters and Eploitees." Both socialism and communism don't divide the "world" (society) at all. They treat everyone the same. In the case of socialism, that treatment is based on the perceived needs of the individual ("to each according to need"). In communism, there is no division at all. Everyone owns everything equally. The only historical example that I know of is the legends in the Bible of Jesus and his disciples. There have been some communes (communistic societies) established in some countries, but these are just experiments in communism. It is capitalism that divides people into exploiters (those with the capital) and exploitees (those who work for them).

I assume you are referring to Greene, not AOC... 😉