It is worth noting that that guy from New York is constitutionally prohibited from being our boyfriend. But we could look for someone more like him.
It is worth noting that that guy from New York is constitutionally prohibited from being our boyfriend. But we could look for someone more like him.
Just the one. But it's already happened.
Added question would be would current law consider him a person? Would killing him be legally classified as murder? Would owning him legally be classified as slavery? And if he did something Snyderish like killing someone, would the deed be considered murder/manslaughter in law ?
And rigid border control wasn't practiced back then. There were people who were neither slaves not citizens living in states when the criterion for counting people was written.
To be fair, he does have compelling evidence that Atlantis existed, and the archaeological establishment refuses to accept it.
The only constitutionally mandated role for a Chief Justice is to preside over presidential impeachment. Of course, the Democratic Party would have to change, or be changed, for them to be willing to do any of this.
In the case of judgeships, which can’t be easily retracted, they will have to be diluted by additional appointments and/or through laws reforming court function. A law could say SC Justices could have 10 years active service, then moved to auxiliary role, filling in when there’s a recusal.
You can expect the person who fires people because of AI to be fired because of AI. It does it more efficiently.
Was the last time he saw him at his house?
A lot of the doctors he appoints to positions in the department will be visited by the Oathbreaker Knight.
Although, if they're Mormon, they would believe every human being's ancestry originated in North America.
Is he talking about the Moriquendi or the Drow? Regardless, it doesn't make sense.
For those who believe that those who don't know Jesus can't be condemned for rejecting him, no Great Commission might suggest hiding his existence from the world rather than proclaiming it everywhere.
Absolutely. A Christianity without the Great Commission or the Book of Revelations would be very different.
Yes, although it's also true that pre-existing beliefs of a people who adopt a religion can alter the religion, at least their iteration of it.
Would England let Scotland leave with its share of North Sea Oil? Would you have to make a deal to effectively bribe England with concessions to either allow independence or prevent an invasion afterwards? (I've no idea how military personnel would feel about invading Scotland.)
Would the iron curtain have fallen further west in Europe?
Will funding cuts make it difficult or impossible to make predictions at that level next year?
But why? They couldn't run that campaign against Vance? (There's not much chance of impeachment going through until 2027, at the earliest, of course. But if they took impeachment all the way, they could still run the standard campaign against the next guy.)
Walla Walla
You didn’t regenerate?
I suppose Federalism and Separation of Powers with Checks & Balances aren't the same thing. But it still seems suspicious that a group that names itself after Federalism would support something that so thoroughly concentrates power.
How does the jurisdiction work for this? Does simply taking the information from someone who lives in a state make the people who did it liable? Do certain actions have to be done within the state to activate legal iability?
And, also, how did the MP react?
What party and what political philosophy did the MP adhere to?
How would nuclear weapons fit into such a breakup? I guess we know from the Ukraine example that the location of the missiles doesn't establish who can launch them. But still, what does a nuclear-armed civil war look like?
I do recognize this as my problem. You have no obligation to take my stories into account.
Oh dear, I had the Q who'd taken on the form of Linnea in [26c] Original Sin claim to be the 1 who kept restoring players.I hope the way this is written, I still can imagine that she did to it for some part of the time, at least. I like when the expanded stories fit together, rather than contradict.
Also, hello—obviously, I made it here.
So clearly, even dematerialized, existence is preserved. This is definitive. It clearly can't be that this is a totally fictional technology that writers can have do what they want, even if doing so is contradicts other parts. Just assume the Heisenberg Compensators make all this work.
And in the 24th century, people could think, see, and move—including grabbing on to other entities—while being transported. (Obviously, people could be paused; otherwise Scotty would have been driven crazy during his time in a pattern buffer, but that's like suspected animation.)
Ah, but regardless of whether the rematerialized matter is the same or new, by the mid-23rd century, people were holding conversations in mid-transport. (See 1:02)
@duncanidaho11.bsky.social Thank you.
