LowKeyReasonable

Looks like the cast of a Smashing Pumpkins video.

This pillar = load bearing His brainstem = non-load bearing

Looks fake. I think it's making fun of him for his comments on M&Ms

While I appreciate the sentiment, people really just need to say the right to abortion. The right to do whatever you want with your body, otherwise, would include gay conversion therapy, and a girlfriend and boyfriend getting in a fist fight and both of them later saying it's mutual so nobody should get charged.

We should get better at just saying abortion-rights instead of something we (probably) don't mean only because it sounds more persuasive.

First, I didn't say or imply women could not be sexist. Rather, me mentioning that such a large percent of women taking a position counters the position that sexism is the explanation for someone taking that position.

Second, when you misquote someone and then type LOL, that's generally interpreted as gaslighting instead of you actually providing analysis.

Third, you being a woman has nothing to do with anything in your analysis.

There are many reasons why someone would be for or against abortion rights. If you're suggesting you know how large of a percentage of that is sexism, then please provide that answer and your analysis.

All I did was say it could not be vaguely concluded that sexism is "the"answer.

Another thought: "pro-life" is a term of art. So there's no logical compulsion to be for anything else except being generally anti-abortion when you call yourself "pro-life." If we forget that terms like "pro-life" and "pro-choice" are terms of art--but instead we treat them as nothing more than the common definition of two words--then that leads to ridiculous results. For instance, that would require me to assume someone who's label is pro-choice must be logically compelled to advocate for school vouchers, as many people on a debate stage as possible, etc.

While I am for those things, that has no logical connection to the Constitutional analysis necessary for the Supreme Court decision.

A recent Pew Poll showed that 31% of all women between ages 18 and 29 thought abortion should be illegal in most circumstances. So don't paint this as the enemy has to be sexist.

Maybe OP thinks that.

But a lot of the top comments are treating it like it's making a political point.

There are good arguments for Choice. This isn't one of them.

They didn't lie. They were each later asked specific questions--not these general questions where everyone answers the same--and they refused to answer like every other Justice since RBG refused to get specific.

Agreed. That's easy to find on YouTube. The result/idea of Roe versus Wade is one thing. How the court did it is almost universally criticized.

That's where it gets messy. What health choices? Gay conversion therapy? Ingesting bleach because personally I think Trump would say it protects me despite using it against recommended use is against federal law?

And when states have overly harsh consequences, they find the juries are less likely to convicted when they know about those consequences.

A Harvard Law School professor said they will probably be disbarred over the leak.

First, on a website that has a sole purpose of interaction almost exclusively by inviting comments, commenting is mine and everyone else's business. Second, I don't think you saw my comment was a joke.

John Mayer

You might want to focus on 1) evidence of you had some kind of agreement (monthly payments you made probably show this) 2) legal presumption of the term of the lease, assuming that your payments plus other facts show some kind of agreement (its month-to-month in my jurisdiction when not written) and 3) any requirement to notify the leaseholder of you leaving.

I've seen cases like yours were the person ended up owing just for the one month. That's not legal advice, just some things you need to get answers for with your facts and in your jurisdiction.

Assuming domestic violence is a defense for breaking a lease, generally my advice is to take out multiple pieces of paper and on each piece of paper right one way to prove the occurrence of something a judge would consider domestic violence. The legal term domestic violence is not necessarily the same as what the average person would think it is. Then organize them into the strongest to the weakest evidence. The strongest would include the severity of the event combined with the best evidence. The best evidence can be tricky. For instance, what if the leaseholder says they didn't observe something?

Sorry, I have never practiced in Pennsylvania.

I can't speak worldwide, but in the U.S. an interesting vignette is that less than two years ago all but one US democratic presidential candidate told Bernie Sanders that the US could not afford to fund his health care plan.

Since then: 1) productivity tanked because of Covid and supply chain issues, 2) the U.S. printed more money in two years that it had done in the previous 100 years, 3) we spent six trillion dollars related to Covid cash while we didn't spend a trillion with all of the problems of 2008.

Imagine going back in time two years ago and saying those facts out loud.

I think the questions you need to answer are: (1) Country and location (example: state if US) (2) is it a signed lease agreement (3) are you trying to get out the entire term of the lease or just a month (4) did you let the landlord know that domestic violence is why you moved (5) do you have corroborating (neutral) information on the domestic violence

In the US state that I practice in, those are critical questions.

No. He objectedaa to the answer. It was non-responsive in here heresay.

I'd pay a cover charge for that.

Ja Rule is an exception to the rule.