Elerond

But BruceVC they are fighting against local Kazakhstan equivalent of BLM movement

Using pepper pray against people is only war crime in war, when police uses it against civilians it is okay

It is communists that people fear Like for example Germany's Strafgesetzbuch section 86a which prohibit public showing of Nazi symbols was adopted during Cold War to block communists parties in West Germany as side effect it also bans Nazi symbols.

In vegan diet problem is often that people that go full vegan also go full organic, which means that they need to have good knowledge of sources of different vitamins and dietary minerals and make their meals versatile in order not have any deficiencies. In organic mixed/meat diets there is often same problems that you are missing some vitamins (like A, C and D vitamins especially during winter in areas where sun only is up couple hours) and dietary minerals like iodine and calcium. As people have accustomed that they don't need make their meals very versatile because of all added vitamins and minerals in typical products that you can by from store, which is people have more often problem with excess of things than deficiencies in their diets.

It was surprise, because we added infectious disease section in the constitution after swine flu in 2009, to give government tools to react quickly to pandemics, but we found out that it had lots of design problems when it come to restrict people's right to travel and gather and business right to do their business. Government had to use quite lot emergency powers meant to for war times, which our parliament felt were governmental overreach, which is why enabling restrictions using them took quite long time and no proactive measures could be used. We also found that competition laws prevented government giving direct assistance to companies, so government had to use development funds to support businesses impacted by covid measures, which meant that businesses had to come up with some sort development plan for their business in order to get assistance. I hope that during next pandemic we have bit more flexible laws that allow to do proactive measures against the disease instead of waiting that situation gets worse enough to allow usage of emergency laws

During this pandemic we have learned that Finland's constitution makes all sort enforcement difficult even if they are meant to protect people from pandemic. Because of business reasons clubs, large social events etc. can disregard all restrictions and guidance if they check that their customers have covid passport to show that they are fully vaccinated or have negative test result from last 72 hours

She didn't break any virus/health regulations. Reason why her actions caused issue was that she left her official phone for office of prime minister home and only had her official phone as member of parliament with her, which is why she missed text message that informed her that our foreign minister has tested positive to covid and guidance from cabinet secretary that she should avoid contacts with people until she has had covid test which is more cautious than official regulations which say that people who have had two jabs of vaccine don't need to avoid contacts with other people. As prime minister needs be available in any time, her leaving her official phone home is used as way to criticize her, even though she didn't break law as she had her second official phone and bodyguards with her and therefore would have been available during emergency, as leaving the phone home caused her to miss important message. More worrisome thing is that we had two other minister who were guided to avoid contact with people after they were informed about foreign ministers positive covid test, but they disregarded that guidance and went in public gatherings with hundreds of people (where prime minister was spending time with her husband and their friendly couple, although in club so there would have still some possibility that she could have infected other people had she had the virus. Although there is restriction that clubs can only allow people who have covid pass in, so everyone in the club would have had two jabs of vaccine)

Union contract that my company uses, has clause that salaries need to be checked yearly and there needs to be 1.2% increase in purchasing power. So yearly salary increase is estimated inflation plus 1.2%. Inflation estimate is done by economists from worker union and employer union together.

Isn't workplace where workers don't get free coffee a paradox, as there can't be work place if no one works there?

same way as you tech other subjects about culture and human behavior like history, psychology, social psychology, religion and philosophy. You teach what people have written about subject, you teach support and criticism those people have got and let students come up with understanding with subject and make their own conclusion with what you have taught them.

Roy L. Brooks defined critical race theory in 1994 as "a collection of critical stances against the existing legal order from a race-based point of view". More specifically, race is a social construct and racism is neither an individual bias nor prejudice, but rather embedded in the legal system and supplemented with policies and procedures. Richard Delgado, a co-founder of the theory, defined it in 2017 as "a collection of activists and scholars interested in studying and transforming the relationship among race, racism, and power". It is meant to be high concept for anthropological studies about legal system from perspective of its different impacts to different races

There are trade, economic and political sanctions against Russia because of its actions, where non-exist towards USA or its allies

That writer of that article has clear agenda. As vaccination prioritization was that oldest and those who belong risks groups were first to be vaccinated and those who have lowest risk from the disease get vaccination in last. So people who had received two dozes of vaccination in June 14 had higher risk to die to covid than most of those who were unvaccinated. Death rate among this group before vaccination was in England from 1.9% to 24%, from which it is dropped to 0.6%. Death rate among non-risk groups were from 0.0001% to 0.066%. So among risk groups death rate has dropped massively and death rate of unvaccinated people is higher than what death rate was during worst times of pandemic among non-risk groups.

I didn't say anything about pro-choice. But they are ones who support personal freedom and that matter is personal. So hypocrisy in this issue is almost totally on 'pro-life' side Also pro-choice politicians seem to mostly support improving social benefits, making schooling free, free health care, parental leaves, preventing firing pregnant people. Where pro-life politicians are mostly against these things.

Actual pro-life movement would actually build social benefits that would ensure that there is no people in poverty and that any child born would have decent place to live, access to good schooling and they don't cause unbearable burden to their parents. Making things illegal don't remove reason why people are seeking abortions

there are some corporations among media, but big sunk of media aren't corporations 0.5% of hospital doctors are against mandatory vaccinations here, so that percentage probably is misinformation based on inaccurate survey EDIT: Also less than 1% of doctors specialize field where they get more than basic information about vaccinations so your average doctor usually doesn't know that much about vaccines or how they actually work, which surveys about vaccines that target whole medical doctorate are more than bit questionable as policy guideline

It is, but that does not prevent anti-abortion people claiming that it is abortifacient here an example https://lozierinstitute.org/plan-b-abortifacient-and-other-risks/ Prescribing information for Plan B points out that the drug works by “preventing ovulation” or “possibly preventing fertilization.” Or it may alter the endometrium and thereby “inhibit implantation.”[1] This refers to implantation of any newly conceived human individual/zygote in the mother’s womb. Hence, the complete clinical pharmacology of Plan B demands that the drug product be duly recognized as an abortifacient – or potential abortifacient – and not merely described as “emergency contraception.” and here another https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pa_acdlife_doc_20001031_pillola-giorno-dopo_en.html 3. It is clear, therefore, that the proven "anti-implantation" action of the morning-after pill is really nothing other than a chemically induced abortion. It is neither intellectually consistent nor scientifically justifiable to say that we are not dealing with the same thing. Science does not matter in these questions and laws implemented to ensure that their ideology is heeded

A medium is not media, to prove that media does something you need to prove that all the mediums do something. Also you make false statements about those protest which CNN is reffing as there were no deaths in said protest. Also even with questionable caption, CNN did show live footage from protest showing burning cars and they mentioned looting that occurred. So they actually reported everything that happened in protest. Meaning that it is questionable if there was actually any misinformation in that example you provided, it mostly show that person who made info graphic that day has questionable view what peaceful means

Just give them time

According to people behind new Texas law plan b is abortifacient and should be illegal

proven fact would actually need proof to exist and thing to be a fact in order it to be proven fact

The idea is to give people bounty to expose abortion that have happened after six weeks, and people get that bounty by suing suspected law breakers in civil court and I they can show that they were breaking Texas' ban for abortions after six week then they are rewarded with 10k dollars bounty/compensation. As most abortion seekers are poor and there are lots of rich people on anti-abortion side, you will see lots of court case against even people who followed Texas law just to cause them financial burden in order to scare people seeking or providing abortions. Law gives purposely unspecified right to sue those who are suspected to help in seeking or providing illegal abortion, so that people would be hesitant to offer any assistance to people seeking legal abortions. As purpose is to effectively create total ban of abortions in Texas. EDIT: This article gives good explanation of the what is the idea behind the law https://qz.com/2054552/a-new-abortion-law-in-texas-turns-citizens-into-bounty-hunters/

Ask Texas state legislature

Question is state legislative (like New York) to allow to people to sue anyone linked to sale of gun used in crime for damages even if person suing didn't suffer from the crime same way as Texas now allows people to sue abortion providers and people who helped person to abortion provider.