You sound mad at a UI change. Best thing you could do is code your own Photoshop and... o I forgot, it's a mammoth task you'd have no hope of ever completing yourself and it looks like you'll have to put up or shut up
Something horrifying. Among other things, the commenter ignored this is about child marriages, but also had some delightful gems like arguing about what women are "designed to do best" for "their happiness". You can imagine the rest. Or just watch The Handmaid's Tale I suppose.
> We can't even prove the current population level is sustainable.
Everyday we prove it slightly more. To exhaust the nutrients in all the mud in the world would take a lot more farming, but we thought that ip4 addresses would never run out either, so maybe it will happen.
Yes; it's currently legal in 34 US States. Here are the 16 that ban the practice: Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Rhode Island, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, Michigan, Washington, Virginia, New Hampshire, Maine, Oregon, and Missouri.
It isn’t just about the letter of the law, it is also about judicial attitudes-two countries can have the same law on paper, but with radically different applications in practice, to the point that it isn’t really the same law.
Yes, in many US states, someone under 18 can legally marry with the permission of a judge. And if the applicant is a pregnant 17 year old who wishes to marry her 17 year old boyfriend so their child isn’t “born out of wedlock”, a lot of judges will say “yes”. But if the applicant is a father who says “I think my 12 year old daughter is old enough to get married, and I found her a husband I like”, no way in hell is any American judge approving that, even if the letter of the law says they could.
But in some other countries, there are judges who would be happy to give that marriage official permission.
I'm not from the US so excuse my ignorance, but if law says it's legal, how is it possible that the judge doesn't grant it? Wouldn't that make it illegal for the judge to do so?
The law usually says it can be done but needs permission from a judge. This is like saying that an after-school activity can be done for children but needs permission from the parent. That doesn't mean the parent must give permission.
Judges are way too busy to officiate most marriages in the US.
Basically any adult can officiate a marriage, then its just a matter of filing the right paperwork with the county clerk - that is what constitutes the legal/civil marriage in the US.
There was the famous case of the clerk in a county in Kentucky refusing to certify same-sex marriages a few years back.
There is also something called "common law" marriages where the state considers you married even if you didn't file the proper paperwork, but were co-habitating and especially if you had children. But this is a dying practice and only recognized by a few states / territories (ironically Washington D.C. is one of them ...)
The law isn't "child marriage is always legal" but "child marriage is allowed in specific cases with a judges consent" basically. They usually need to be given a reason to make an exception
I'd guess your pot/kettle comment is something nationalist/political? My prior comment was trying to say it's universal, not some "country X is good/bad" dig.
Degree matters. A lot. Saying "it's universal" because there is some frequency everywhere is misleading. There are many country Xs that absolutely deserve to be called out as bad, because they are relatively so much worse than the best countries, or even the average ones.
My intent: "it's universal" means the correlation between girls being low-value and child marriages is universal.
Your seeming reading: "it's universal" means child marriage occurs in every country...but that is a huge tactical mistake to say, because it gets in the way of us condemning countries where the problem is much worse than in ours.
My concern is for the girls, not for scoring point for condemning countries. To actually help the girls, the article seems to provide a proven solution. So let's do more of what works.
Vs. what is the track record for major non-aligned nations (like Nigeria) implementing progressive social reforms at scale, in response to moral condemnation by foreigners? That I've heard of, not good.
I agree scolding generally isn't effective, especially when the scolding party has no power to enforce rules.
At the same time, I see no reason not to make the condemnation. It's not being made to effect change, but reaffirm our own norms which, in this specific case, I believe are better, and we shouldn't avoid saying so and call that enlightened. I think it's a form of cowardice.
And in this connected age, perhaps a Nigerian girl could take some hope, or energy, or solace knowing that much of the world does think the way she is treated is wrong, and not normal, and that her intuition to that effect has grounding, despite the powerful local norms she finds herself faced with.
Metals (miners <> manufacturers) and agricultural (farmers <> food makers) futures are still non-speculative. There are industries that still buy materials from these markets, for delivery, as in they want to see the physical product in their hands. I was surprised to find that out as well
I'm just glad I'm alive to witness it. Ww2 is what finally sank Britain's declining empireafter ww1, I'm hoping Iran and maybe a global war finally knocks them off that top spot and the east takes over
> The drugs are thought to help by boosting flexible thinking and allowing people to escape destructive cognitive ruts
I love drugs as much as the next reprobate, but i feel like some people deify psychedelics a bit too much. They only study "classic" psycadellics that release serotonin. Take LSD and MDMA and you'll see the overlap in effects due to the serotonin. This isn't present in harsh psycadellics like Salvia, that whilst making you hallucinate aren't pleasurable.
reply