Gender Studies and Math

However, Facebook seems to disagree as evidenced in this ABC News piece from 2014:

Here’s a List of 58 Gender Options for Facebook Users

by Russell Goldman February 13, 2014

Facebook introduced dozens of options for users to identify their gender today – and although the social media giant said it would not be releasing a comprehensive list, ABC News has found at least 58 so far.

Previously, users had to identify themselves as male or female. They were also given the option of not answering or keeping their gender private.

User’s can now select a “custom” gender option.

“There’s going to be a lot of people for whom this is going to mean nothing, but for the few it does impact, it means the world,” Facebook software engineer Brielle Harrison told the Associated Press. Harrison, who worked on the project, is in the process of gender transition, from male to female.

Facebook will also allow users to select between three pronouns: “him,” “her” or “their.”

The following are the 58 gender options identified by ABC News:

Agender
Androgyne
Androgynous
Bigender
Cis
Cisgender

Read the rest of the list HERE, which as the title of the song by the rock group, ABBA says, goes On And On And On.

‘Free Speech Is Dead’ – Police in Khan’s London BAN Pro-Trump Rally at U.S. Embassy

Isabel Infantes/Afp/Getty Images

by Jack Montgomery

Police in Sadiq Khan’s London have used the Public Order Act to prevent a rally in support of U.S. President Donald Trump outside the American embassy, despite permitting a large, ill-tempered anti-Trump rally on Friday.

Protestors attending the ‘Welcome Trump’ event had planned to gather outside the embassy and march from there to Whitehall, where they would have joined in with a separate ‘Free Tommy Robinson’ event in support of the activist and independent journalist who was recently imprisoned for contempt of court after reporting on a grooming gang trial.

But the Metropolitan Police Force, which answers to a large extent to Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, used the Public Order Act to impose a raft of restrictions on both groups of protesters which made this impossible —  despite allowing far larger anti-Trump protests at which at least six people were arrested to go ahead on Saturday, with demonstrators carrying signs emblazoned with harsh profanity and messages such as “Die Trump Die”.

“I was planning to go to the American embassy to meet with a group of demonstrators who are planning to welcome Trump into the country… it’s really good to see him in this country, and speaking truth to the people in power in this country,” explained David Kurten, an elected member of the London Assembly for the Brexit-supporting UK Independence Party. Continue reading at breitbart.com.

NBC’s Katy Tur Not Sold on ‘Strict Originalist View of Constitution’ Because it’s 2018

Paul Morigi/Getty Images for Fortune

NBC News’ Katy Tur on Wednesday questioned whether the Supreme Court should take an originalist view of the Constitution — because we are living in the current year.

A partial transcript follows:

TUR: I do want to start with you, J.D. Based on where Americans stand on the issues, and Americans have really moved in a much more progressive direction over the years, do you think it’s appropriate to continue to take such a strict originalist view of the Constitution given it’s 2018 and not 1776? [The Constitution was written in 1787.]

VANCE: Well, I don’t know that Americans have become more Progressive on everything. Certainly, times have changed since 1776, but how you interpret the Constitution is ultimately different from what policy preferences you want.

This is a point conservatives make pretty often about the Supreme Court. Whether you want the laws to move in a progressive or conservative direction, the Supreme Court is a separate institution with a separate mandate under our constitutional structures.

For example, if you want abortion to be outlawed or you want abortion not to be outlawed, that is a question, and there’s an open debate around whether that question should be decided by the Supreme Court or that question should be decided by voters and state legislatures, and by federal legislators. That is a question to me about constitutional structure, not so much about policy preferences. Continue reading at breitbart.com.

Click on this link for more about our Founders

Opinion – A Liberal’s Case for Brett Kavanaugh

By Akhil Reed Amar

Judge Brett Kavanaugh, shown here in 2004, is President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court.CreditScott J. Ferrell/Congressional Quarterly, via Getty Images

The nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to be the next Supreme Court justice is President Trump’s finest hour, his classiest move. Last week the president promised to select “someone with impeccable credentials, great intellect, unbiased judgment, and deep reverence for the laws and Constitution of the United States.” In picking Judge Kavanaugh, he has done just that.

In 2016, I strongly supported Hillary Clinton for president as well as President Barack Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court, Judge Merrick Garland. But today, with the exception of the current justices and Judge Garland, it is hard to name anyone with judicial credentials as strong as those of Judge Kavanaugh. He sits on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the most influential circuit court) and commands wide and deep respect among scholars, lawyers and jurists.

Judge Kavanaugh, who is 53, has already helped decide hundreds of cases concerning a broad range of difficult issues. Good appellate judges faithfully follow the Supreme Court; great ones influence and help steer it. Several of Judge Kavanaugh’s most important ideas and arguments — such as his powerful defense of presidential authority to oversee federal bureaucrats and his skepticism about newfangled attacks on the property rights of criminal defendants — have found their way into Supreme Court opinions. Continue reading at nytimes.com.

 

 

In “The Swamp,” Fearless Reps Expose the Corruption on Capitol Hill

by Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.

Unlike many other politicians who have promised to take on the establishment and “drain the swamp,” Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) is actually trying to do just that, and is taking some serious flak for his exposure of the Deep State and its agents on Capitol Hill.

In a video series entitled The Swamp,Massie, along with Representatives Dave Brat and Tom Garrett of Virginia, Ken Buck of Colorado, Rod Blum of Iowa, and Ted Yoho of Florida (bold type: mine), are showing people “what happens behind the scenes in Congress.” To date, there are four episodes, each running about 10 minutes.

Besides pulling back the curtain to reveal the names and tactics of those who really pull the legislative levers in Congress, The Swamp videos make it very obvious that, although there are 435 members of the House of Representatives, the key decisions are made by a handful of very powerful leaders bent on controlling the country and that the betrayal is bipartisan.

(Note: Right click the video and then click on Unmute if needed.)

When asked about how bills get passed when there seems to be opposition in Congress, at least when controversial bills are first offered, Representative Blum responded, “Most all the decisions around here are made by a few people at the very top, without the input of any other congressional members or U.S. senators. That’s not good representative government, wouldn’t you say?”

As for which party is most responsible for the bankrupting of the country and the disregard of the Constitution and its enumerated powers, another segment of The Swamp points the finger at both sides of the aisle.

“I think both parties are engaged in a quiet deal that we will support our base, and if it leads to bankruptcy, okay, and you will support your base, and if it leads to bankruptcy, okay,” Representative Buck says in Episode 1.

(Note: Right click the video and then click on Unmute if needed.)

Episode 1 Meet the Troublemakers
Episode 2: Everything comes From the Top
Episode 3: Dirty Money and Backroom Deals
Episode 4: Consequences

Continue reading and watch episodes 2 through 4 at thenewamerican.com.
(Note: Right click the videos and then click on Unmute if needed.)

Hat tip: Kafir Carol

View moreLoading ...