I don’t agree with it, but you must realize that the counterpoint is not with the intention to “restrict bodily autonomy” but because they believe life has value before birth. Be fair please.
I think that is a horrible and regrettable hypothetical, but one that should be allowed by the law. In the same way that I think Christians can be turned away at the door by a hardcore atheist.
If something about someone genuinely makes you uncomfortable, you should be allowed to distance yourself from them.
Not at the expense of other races. In 2023 you don’t exactly get to choose what races you value over others. Thanks SCOTUS.
I object to only solving part of the problem in a way that disadvantages other groups. Lifting a certain group out of poverty while suppressing another, entirely based on race is, well, racist. Kinda simple
The racial wealth gap is a selective problem that is encompassed entirely within the general, race-less problem of poverty in the United States. Fixing the big problem also checks off your small one.
So there being more black people in poverty, would selecting more of the impoverished not work towards solving the racial wealth gap?
And why should a white or Asian person that can’t keep the lights on be given less of a chance than an affluent black person with a worse application?
So you’re implying that you would want to give that person your business anyway? This ruling means nothing, find another web designer
This app looks great! (Lemur is a great name, you should stick with it.)
Are the screenshots from the Android app? It definitely looks like it, but I was wondering if the iOS version would lean towards iOS UI design rather than Google guidelines.
What an offensively misleading headline. ~$15.6m a year for employee salaries that only deal with diversity issues is INSANE. Especially with taxpayer money. Sorry y’all but these cuts are a good thing.
