#criteria applying procedure

[destructive-delight]

if it turns out that i’m unfit to donate blood i will actually lose it for good.

[mariacallous]

 Our Nation has made tremendous progress in advancing the cause of equality for LGBTQI+ Americans, including in the military.  Despite their courage and great sacrifice, thousands of LGBTQI+ service members were forced out of the military because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.  Many of these patriotic Americans were subject to a court-martial.  While my Administration has taken meaningful action to remedy these problems, the impact of that historical injustice remains.  As Commander in Chief, I am committed to maintaining the finest fighting force in the world.  That means making sure that every member of our military feels safe and respected.

     Accordingly, acting pursuant to the grant of authority in Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution of the United States, I, Joseph R. Biden Jr., do hereby grant a full, complete, and unconditional pardon to persons convicted of unaggravated offenses based on consensual, private conduct with persons age 18 and older under former Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), as previously codified at 10 U.S.C. 925, as well as attempts, conspiracies, and solicitations to commit such acts under Articles 80, 81, and 82, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. 880, 881, 882.  This proclamation applies to convictions during the period from Article 125’s effective date of May 31, 1951, through the December 26, 2013, enactment of section 1707 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Public Law 113-66).

     The purpose of this proclamation is to pardon only offenses based on consensual, private conduct between individuals 18 and older that do not involve any aggravating factor, including:  

     (1)  conduct that would violate 10 U.S.C. 893a, prohibiting activities with military recruits or trainees by a person in a position of special trust;      (2)  conduct that was committed with an individual who was coerced or, because of status, might not have felt able to refuse consent;      (3)  conduct on the part of the applicant constituting fraternization under Article 134 of the UCMJ;      (4)  conduct committed with the spouse of another military member; or      (5)  any factors other than those listed above that were identified by the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in United States v. Marcum as being outside the scope of Lawrence v. Texas as applied in the military context, 60 M.J. 198, 207–08 (2004).

     The Military Departments (Army, Navy, or Air Force), or in the case of the Coast Guard, the Department of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Department of Justice, shall provide information about and publicize application procedures for certificates of pardon.  An applicant for a certificate of pardon under this proclamation is to submit an application to the Military Department (Army, Navy, or Air Force) that conducted the court-martial or, in the case of a Coast Guard court-martial, to the Department of Homeland Security.  If the relevant Department determines that the applicant satisfies the criteria under this proclamation, following a review of relevant military justice records, the Department shall submit that determination to the Attorney General, acting through the Pardon Attorney, who shall then issue a certificate of pardon along with information on the process to apply for an upgrade of military discharge.  My Administration strongly encourages veterans who receive a certificate of pardon to apply for an upgrade of military discharge.  

     Although the pardon under this proclamation applies only to the convictions described above, there are other LGBTQI+ individuals who served our Nation and were convicted of other crimes because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.  It is the policy of my Administration to expeditiously consider and to make final pardon determinations with respect to such individuals.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-sixth day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-four, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-eighth.                              JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.

[peaceblank]

Should I pursue a degree as pathology assistant, it pays well, but I'd have to stick around in this job, and I dont want to go back to school again.

[feministfang]

Beauty culture is extremely normalised to the point women who refuse to conform to beauty standards because they love their natural selves get labelled "pick mes" by none other than self-proclaimed feminists themselves. Patriarchal society has conditioned women to be insecure about each and every feature of their faces or bodies it has deemed as a flaw due to which the idea of a natural looking woman is someone hideous and unattractive for many young women.

These insecure women have build up this one image of a natural female appearance in their minds which they describe as unattractive, and as a consequence, women who naturally do not fit into that unattractive-labelled box get hated on. I am sure we all have encountered at least one gossipmonger in our lives who would assume every woman who does not fit into that box has done something with her face or body because ‘ain’t no way a woman can be naturally beautiful’.

*Woman with rosy cheeks exists* — ‘Oh she must have applied makeup’

*Woman with no dark circles exists* — ‘hey what concealer do you use?’

*Woman with a smooth skin exists* — ‘drop the skincare routine!’

*Woman with big lips exists* — ‘definitely lip filler’

*Woman in her thirties exists* — ‘Botox! Botox! Definitely cosmetic surgery! She doesn’t look like a grandma!’

*Woman loving her natural self exists* — ‘How dare you think you’re not like other girls! Pick me!’

Women get bodyshamed if we do fit into the "ugly-looking" criteria. Women get hated on if we do not. Women are supposed to be hideously flawed if they defy beauty culture. Women with even one less flaw must admit they obey beauty culture. No matter how many times you ditch the beauty standards, you will never escape this nonsense.

I have a message for these insecure clowns:

There is nothing imperfect about you. What’s considered perfect and what’s considered imperfect on a woman is all a patriarchal set up to push us into being weak and desirable for men. Women’s insecurities have risen up along with the rise of feminism to ensure that independent women rejecting traditional gender roles are still submissive and pleasing men. Don’t waste your hard-earned money on expensive cosmetic procedures to look pretty because you are already naturally beautiful. And it doesn’t matter if your natural self is socially desirable or not, women don’t owe beauty to anybody. Please think critically of why you feel insecure about something and why do you even call it a flaw.

But on a strict note, in case you still got time to take out your brain back from the patriarchy’s washing machine, at least refrain from pulling us all down to the level of extreme self-hate where you stand. All women are perfect already. There’s no serious requirement of hiding anything or changing ourselves. But i understand if you cannot relate for now! What you see in others is a direct reflection of yours. But just because you think you are hideous does not mean every woman thinks the same way. Self-love is our only beauty routine so let us love ourselves. 🩷

[prokopetz]

Like, I'm not gonna argue that AI art in its present form doesn't have numerous ethical issues, but it strikes me that a big chunk of the debate about it seems to be drifting further and further toward an argument against procedurally generated art in general, which probably isn't a productive approach, if only because it's vulnerable to having its legs kicked out from under it any time anybody thinks to point out how broad that brush is. If the criteria you're setting forth for the ethical use of procedurally generated art would, when applied with an even hand, establish that the existence of Dwarf Fortress is unethical, you probably need to rethink your premises!

[akookminsupporter]

Someone shared this article on Twitter and using AI again, I was able to translate it more accurately, I think.

"Is there a way to experience military life with a friend?"

Published on July 7, 2022

One representative way to experience military life with friends is by joining the Army together through the companion enlistment program. This program allows close friends or relatives, such as schoolmates or siblings, to enlist together, undergo training, and serve in the same unit until their discharge, supporting each other throughout their military service.

To be eligible for companion enlistment, individuals aged 18 to 28 as of the year of application submission, and are eligible for active duty service in physical grades 1 to 4, can apply without the need for a military examination. Those not undergoing a military examination will only go through a physical examination if selected in the first round. If eligibility criteria are met, they are finally selected as companion enlistees.

The application period is generally from the end of each month to the beginning of the next month, and if you apply as a companion enlisted soldier and are finally selected, you will be enlisted 3 months from the application deadline. After applying, enlisted soldiers are selected through a computerized lottery without any procedures such as submission of additional documents or interviews. If disqualifications arise due to physical grade or criminal history, they will be excluded from selection.

After enlistment, accompanying enlisted soldiers serve in units within the same living area as friends or relatives who enlisted together. In standing divisions/army and corps direct service, they serve together at the medium and platoon level, and in regional/mobilized divisions, they serve together at the medium and battalion level. The service area is the field unit (Gangwon, Gyeonggi area) under the Ground Operations Command (Eastern and Western).

For detailed information on applying for companion enlistment, you can check the Military Manpower Administration website.

[saintsenara]

the wizarding world really just does not care about anything huh? i mean. what would have happened if tom had been institutionalized due to his magic?

thank you very much for the ask, anon!

i need to actually get around to writing the big meta i have on the idea - which i know a few people have asked me about - that hogwarts applies some level of selection [that is, that - despite what lupin says in deathly hallows - it doesn't teach the majority of magical children in britain, whether they're born to magical or muggle families] when it comes to who it admits, and that muggleborn potential pupils who fall short of its criteria never get the letter-delivery meeting that we see the canonical tom riddle receive.

which would mean that, had tom been committed to a psychiatric hospital as a child, i think the wizarding world would have quietly struck his name off the list for potential admittance to hogwarts and continued on untroubled.

which is obviously grim.

although i think it's worth saying that, while there is a lot about 1930s psychiatric care which was legitimately inhumane - and the sort of one flew over the cuckoo's nest-style dystopian vibe, which makes the idea of poor wee tom being stuck in a hospital seem so terrifying, isn't entirely inaccurate - there's also, as odd as it sounds, a chance that he might have been genuinely helped by the psychiatric treatment of the time period.

we picture the psychiatric treatment of the early twentieth century as straitjackets and padded cells and lobotomies - violent and dehumanising procedures with no clinical benefit - because [as is often the case today in the way mental illness is spoken about both clinically and culturally] the medical community tended to regard anything accompanied by psychosis [schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, and so on] as intensive, untreatable and unmanageable [and to - therefore - institutionalise patients with these symptoms permanently].

but at the same time, mental illness which wasn't accompanied by [long-term] psychosis [depression, anxiety disorders, addiction, ptsd and so on] was increasingly seen not only as treatable, but as curable - and clinicians' aims were for patients to be treated temporarily either in the community or in modern hospitals which looked very different from the padded-cell asylums which were holdovers of the victorian/edwardian era, and to live independently after their course of treatment was done.

this was largely due to the prevalence of "shell-shock" and "soldiers' neuroses" - which we would nowadays understand as types of post-traumatic stress disorder - among men who had served in the first world war. these men - often from "respectable" backgrounds, with no history of mental illness in their families - were a very different demographic of patient than either the destitute "lunatic" or the hysterical woman of the victorian and edwardian imagination. they were also needed back in the trenches - but with their symptoms under control enough that they weren't considered dangerous to their fellow soldiers.

and treatments for shell-shock were - as a result - considerably more humane than the contemporary treatment of psychosis. emphasis was put on holistic treatments - especially the chance for men who had been shivering in the trenches to get a period of real rest - and on talking.

[british army officers were ordered - for example - to attempt to reduce shell-shock cases by encouraging their men to process their experiences of the war in individual and group settings.]

after the end of the war, the treatment of long-term shell-shock combined with the growing interest in "analysis" - which, while the image i'm sure many of us have of it is of sigmund freud suggesting the patient wanted to fuck his own mother, actually looked rather a lot like the various branches of psychotherapy do today - into courses of treatment for conditions like depression, anxiety, and ptsd [especially those caused by childhood trauma] which aren't actually terrible...

the way the young tom riddle speaks about magic in canon absolutely sounds like psychosis to someone who doesn't know he's a wizard - and so, yes, there is a very high chance that he would have been institutionalised to be stuck in restraints for the rest of his life.

but it's also the case that, since he was a child when mrs cole was trying to have him "looked at" by doctors, this increasing disciplinary focus on the psychological motivations for behaviour - especially in childhood; child psychology and the causes of juvenile delinquency were things the psychiatric community was increasingly interested in during the 1930s - might, instead, have had his belief that he could do magic put down to a fantasy which he had invented on account of his numerous [and treatable] neuroses.

and while it's not the case that he's making up being a wizard... it very much is the case that he's neurosis-central. you've never seen a more unbalanced ego.

and that actually being prompted to confront his childhood trauma [especially his grief over his mother's death] - even when the strange, freudian flavour any psychotherapy would undoubtedly have had is taken into account - would probably have done rather more to actually help him than hogwarts' "ignoring children's emotional needs is fine" approach...

[notasapleasure]

This whole shit show stems from a unilateral and non-transparent decision made by the discredited leader of the IBA at the world championship.

Since Rio and accusations of rigged matches, the IOC have refused to deal with the IBA and they're seeking a new body to manage boxing in LA '28.

Both [Imane Khelif of Algeria and Lin Yu-ting of Taiwan] were disqualified from the 2023 World Championships in New Delhi, which was run by the International Boxing Association (IBA).

Khelif was disqualified hours before her gold-medal fight, while Lin was stripped of her bronze.

In a statement yesterday, the IBA said the “disqualification was a result of their failure to meet the eligibility criteria for participating in the women’s competition, as set and laid out in the IBA Regulations”.

These regulations state that only people with XX sex chromosomes can compete in women categories.

The IBA regulations add that “boxers can be submitted to a random and/or targeted gender test to confirm the above”.

Women typically have XX chromosome pairs, and men typically have XY pairs.

IBA president, Russia’s Umar Kremlev, previously said in a post to Telegram post that DNA tests had “proved they had XY chromosomes and were thus excluded”.

This detail was not included in yesterday’s statement by the IBA, which said the “specifics” of the tests undertaken by both boxers “remain confidential”.

So whatever this test was, the IBA feel they can chat about it on social media but not include it in their official statements? Or, not even the IBA, but Umar Kremlev, who has links to the Russian state and who the IOC demanded step down after Rio if the IBA was to continue working with the Olympics.

“These two athletes were the victims of a sudden and arbitrary decision by the IBA. Towards the end of the IBA World Championships in 2023, they were suddenly disqualified without any due process.

“According to the IBA minutes available on their website, this decision was initially taken solely by the IBA Secretary General and CEO. The IBA Board only ratified it afterwards and only subsequently requested that a procedure to follow in similar cases in the future be established and reflected in the IBA Regulations. The minutes also say that the IBA should “establish a clear procedure on gender testing.

“The current aggression against these two athletes is based entirely on this arbitrary decision, which was taken without any proper procedure – especially considering that these athletes had been competing in top-level competition for many years.

So this whole thing is playing off and whipping up transphobia, intersexism and racism, but afaik neither of the women involved have made any statement about even being intersex. I recommend caution applying this term until we hear anything from the women concerned, not least given the bizarre lack of transparency around the tests conducted by the IBA. Think of Caster Semenya, who does not choose to use the word intersex to describe herself, who has been through hell having her identity pored over and defined over her wishes in public, and be fucking careful with your language <3

[ask-thearchivists]

What's your favorite thing about mortals Cataloger? :0

The Cataloger: Uh...I dunno. It's just kind of cool to see the mortals I catalog for a change.

The Curator: You never get to see the mortals you sort? Do you at least get to know some information about them? How else are you supposed to properly sort them otherwise?

The Cataloger: No, father doesn't believe it is necessary for me to know much about the mortals. I sort them according to how father sorted them before I was created, which is from most thriving specimen to least thriving on origin planet.

The Curator: That is actually the worst and most outdated criteria to sort them by! What "thrives" is subjective instead of objective, and thus fails new standardized procedure for categorizing. That's like sorting them based on how much you like the way they taste or which you think are the cutest.

The Cataloger: I KNOW! It's so frustrating but father will not have me speak ill of his preferred methods or changing them. He thinks it's better because it saves the time of me needing to learn the information needed to apply the other methods.

[not-goldy]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nationalheraldindia.com/amp/story/international/skorean-cabinet-passes-bills-to-allow-single-people-to-adopt

Simple

It's only been 1 yr since this new ammendment. And it's gonna be even easier in 10- 15 years as single parent system is increasing rapidly because most korean woman wants to get married/get pregnant and birth rate is declining. So if he wants kids while also being with JK.. all he wants to do is adopt a baby while being single dad officially. He satisfies all official criteria as of now.. he got money and influence which makes legal processes easier and makes him 10x privileged than average single parent.

Do you all really think Jikook 'luckily' won that lottery system to enlist together? Be fr. They might have started the procedures in August but I bet they didn't had to go through 'computer lottery selection'.. they got power, they got money, they got influence, they are governments fav child who they want to finish service fast and start milking, they will be promoted two times faster than average soldier, they will be appointed as head roles in their camps, they will be allowed for companion enlistment if they applied for that, THEY ARE BTS... ONE OF THE PROMINENT PEOPLE IN SK. If SK government approved a Korean queer couple to enlist together and turned a blind eye towards all those protests against it... they don't mind Park Jimin adopting a baby while being in a relationship with Jeon Jungkook. All they want is a official record signing Park Jimin is a single parent, just to make legal sides clear... with whom he's raising that kid is not their concern.

Yea I'm done with them.

They know and admit Jikook have privilege and power but fail to see how and where that privilege and power works in their favor.

Personally I don't want them to just adopt, although any child they adopt would be so lucky- and my goodness would it be nice if they adopt children of different races😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭

I will uproot my life and volunteer as nanny with no pay for the rest of my life. I will take care of them kids like they are the most precious beings on this earth🥺

I do want to see their own biological kids too you know?

A Mini Min with his father's eyes and lips and if they turn out even more androgynous with big booty then what😩

Also they will be so loved by us BTS and their kids🥺

One wrote in and said, well single father has nothing to do with Jungkook. They think JM would have to cut Jungkook out of his life at some point in order to live a traditional life.

They are very very highly ignorant if that's what they think. Jungkook will forever be a part of JMs life unless they fall out of love at some point- and even then they would be very good friends too.

Like I said it's his choice and he certainly has options if all that is in his way is institutionalized homophobia.

They came up with a travel documentary as an excuse to go on a trip together before serving they can certainly come up with a billion other creative ways to enjoy a fulfilling life together.

If not, then all the more reason for them to enjoy it while it last. What is it JK says, make hay while the sun shine.

Two years ago I almost broke up with my girl for good because of these uncertainties. I knew I didn't want children, didn't even consider let alone desire marriage because coming from a very conservative Christian black home, that's not an option to marry a woman. You can't be gay and you can't be unmarried and childless. And for me, those who know think it's some sort of phase I will outgrow once I'm faced with reality.

So while I am this way, hiding the truth of what I am from people in my life, openly living in my truth when I'm away from my family- I'm learning to stand up to them. To confront them with my truths without shame and with confidence.

I'm not hiding anymore- may be a little. Lol. But I'm not making excuses anymore. I'm not telling them, I'm still young I'll worry about that latter. I'm not saying, she's just a good friend. That the rumors are false. That I'm waiting for the right one, that I haven't found the right man- I'm not saying all that anymore.

I may not able to tell it as it is but I'm telling exactly what it is not.

No I don't want a wedding but yes I do want life long commitment and I want legal rights with it dammit

I want consistent immutable inalienable rights and that is more important to me than having kids getting married and all that other stuff.

I want to be able to live my life in peace and not worry about changing laws that give one minute and take away the next.

I want freedom. I want paradise.

and may be one day I'll want children may be I won't.

I want what I want and I don't want what I don't want. I'm manifesting for myself through positive affirmations.

Nothing is as black and white as they make it seem.

And I'm cautious in this discourse because some have committed suicide rather than "face reality" or choose to conform to these societal standards they are perpetuating and wielding over jikook's heads.

They are perpetuating the very thing oppressing us and the very thing we spend most of our lives fighting.

They are not saying if Jikook are gay this system would be a challenge for them as it has been for others, they are saying this is the system and Jikook have no right to go against it. This is the system, they must conform to the status quo as many queer men have and they will.

There's something oppresive, sinister and disturbing about that to me. The lengths they will sink to to invalidate Jikook is crazy.

On the flip side, pointing out Jikook's privileges too too much also alienates them and puts a target on their backs as we might make it look as if they would not have to face all the many real struggles others face due to their sexual orientation in SK. It's a lose lose situation however you look at it.

It's their life their choice and whatever they choose to do is very valid. I'm sorry to Jikook they have to deal with this and I pray things get better in SK over time as you have rightfully pointed out.

I stand with Jikook and every queer person in that system. Things are a bit better today compared to years ago but boy are they living in the vip region of hell.

And Bang PD's advice to that artist about the challenges he would face if he chooses to live his truth and wear heels will always give me comfort especially the fact he was willing to help him make it work in his career in spite of the odds against him

I know, there are people close to jikook with the same mentality. They know the "reality" and situation on the ground, they empathize with them, are willing to direct them on how to make it work if they choose this path and so they don't feel isolated.

Please help me support Jikook okay? Stay with them to the end, pray for them love them fight for them.

The challenges they face, I wish I could say it's all just fiction, it's real, it's dangerous, it's traumatizing, the mental turmoil alone is

Sigh.

Support Jikook. Jikook is real.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Social Impurity

Published: May 11, 2024

The occupation of university campuses by terrorist supporters celebrating the October 7th massacre of Israeli citizens and visitors to the country by Hamas and calling for more Jewish blood makes abundantly clear the extent to which our academic institutions have been damaged by the ideology of diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI, sometimes also called EDI). Yet, against the backdrop of positive news (MIT dropping DEI statements, UNC System votes to repeal its DEI policy, UT Austin laying off multiple DEI employees, multiple universities re-instating standardized testing for admissions), there are continued calls to reform, rather than eliminate, DEI, claims that diversity, equality, and inclusion are “important values”, as well as paradoxical remarks that with proper definitions of the three terms, the ideology can be salvaged, returned to its original “good intentions”.

In my view, the problem here is that many Westerners misunderstand what DEI is, how it works, and why it is so destructive. They misunderstand it because they were born, grew up, and lived in democratic, capitalist societies that valued individual freedoms and responsibilities, while DEI at its core is a collectivist ideology. Therefore, its comprehension comes easier to those of us who experienced collectivist notions first-hand.

A good example of this misunderstanding is the term “DEI hire” that is being applied to individuals, most recently the disgraced former president of Harvard University Claudine Gay and the democratically elected Mayor of Baltimore Brandon M. Scott. The problem is that DEI does not operate at the level of individuals, but on the scale of the entire society, by modifying the selection criteria for admissions, hiring, and promotion. The term, therefore, is an oxymoron; everyone hired in academia in the past decade or so has been a DEI hire, and that is precisely why the ideology is so destructive. DEI works by replacing selection criteria that have previously been based on merit with those based on an allegiance to the ideology, propagating its destruction in the space of multitude of institutions, and in time—through generations of faculty and students. Whereas in the past, hiring and admission decisions were based on one’s ability to do the job, thirst for knowledge, and aptitude to pursue it, now they are based on one’s ability to perpetuate the ideology and its growing bureaucracies. The result is a communist dream, where those who were nothing, are becoming everything—with the associated destructive consequences.

A detour is needed here to address one of the most pervasive myths behind the need for DEI: that academia was never a meritocracy. This nonsense is being repeated ad nauseum in the hopes that repeating it will somehow make it true. One argument is that it could not possibly have been a meritocracy because the applicant pool was limited: e.g., women were not admitted to educational institutions, quotas were instituted limiting the admission of Jewish candidates, etc. Yes, imposing such limits on the applicant pool is a bad thing. Progressive societies have been doing away with these practices (unlike regressive societies, cue the Taliban). Yet, the principles that were used to select candidates from the limited pool – those principles were based on ability and aptitude and were, at their core, meritocratic, much like sex-segregated athletics or chess remain meritocratic in each sex category.

A more poignant criticism is not that academia wasn’t meritocratic, but that meritocracy itself is imperfect; that the failure of nominally meritocratic procedures resulted in the selection of the proverbial “wrong man for the job”. This, of course, is true: anyone who’s ever set foot on a university campus has no doubt encountered people of very questionable qualifications. Coupled with limited applicant pools, such failures of meritocratic selection evoke a deep sense of unfairness: why should someone incompetent be selected over someone who had no chance to compete in the first place? They shouldn’t, of course.

Meritocracy is imperfect. That is a fact. Arguing with facts is counterproductive. Admission, hiring, and promotion procedures must continuously be improved. Yet, it is imperfect in the same sense as democracy or capitalism are imperfect: there simply is no viable alternative—as long as we want things to work, that is; for the human race to continue to survive, peacefully prosper, and progress. After all, we know very well what happens to societies that exchange the imperfection of democracy and capitalism for the perfection of communism, socialism, or national socialism. Indeed, DEI has already led to some spectacularly unqualified individuals infiltrating academia—Claudine Gay is merely one example—and the storm of violent, antisemitic, pro-Hamas protests.

DEI grew out of authoritarian ideologies and is repeating their tried and tired destructive paradigms. It is based on the fallacy that a fair selection must reflect the composition of the population, on fighting “overrepresentation”—the same notions were used by the Nazis to justify their antisemitic policies in German and Austrian universities, and beyond, in 1930s; It is based on the notion that everyone must first and foremost be an activist, guarding ideological purity and promoting contemporary notions of morality and social justice—the notion adopted in the USSR, where every act and statement were imbued with political significance, one that was either in accordance the party line, or against it.

This brings me to my final point. According to Theodosius Dobzhansky, a Russian-American geneticist and evolutionary biologist who was fortunate to have escaped Lysenko’s purges by defecting to the West, “nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” Neo-Marxists occupying Western universities, following in the anti-Darwinist footsteps of their forebears, criticize the “survival of the fittest” approach to admissions, hiring, and promotion. But a living system subject to a selection pressure will always evolve; the only question is, what will it be evolving towards? In other words, “survival of the fittest” is a universal law. What changes with the nature of the selection pressure is not whether the fittest survive—they always do—but what they are fit for. Those, who survive the selection based on DEI ideology, are fit for activism, cowardice of mobs, bigotry, antisemitism and other forms of racism, violence and destruction. This is exactly what we see in today’s campus protests, and this has always been the point: to produce generations of activists who not only lack knowledge, but who were robbed of the skills needed to develop it, of the curiosity to seek answers to their questions beyond the “party line”. There never were any good intentions.

[blushcoloreddreams]

Dream hair at home - how to choose and use shampoo

Why are there so many different shampoos? What is the real function of shampoo? How to use it correctly and how choose the shampoo according to your scalp type? Now let's take a very important step for you have perfect hair! You will learn the correct form to use shampoo. Yes, it all starts here, because the way you use this product will have an impact directly to the health of your hair. Well, you may have noticed that there is a huge variety of shampoos on the shelves, right? Shampoo for dry hair, for unruly hair, for oily hair, shampoo for chemically treated hair, brittle, for blond hair, for dyed hair, micellar shampoo… And choosing the right shampoo may be a great difficulty for you. “What is the right shampoo for me?” That's what you ask yourself when you're in front of that crowded shelf. Many people end up choosing better-smelling shampoo, as they really have no knowledge about the selection criteria. And it is to explain what the shampoo is for and make this choice easier for you that I made in this post.

Function

The shampoo was made to clean the scalp.It is designed to clean. It's a type of detergent. And, like all detergents, shampoo is made to dissolve grease and clean the environment. Just to be clear: know the detergent you use in the kitchen? It is also made to dissolve fat and to clean. Body soap, facial soap, hand soap… they all have the function of dissolving fat produced by your skin and remove dirt from the area. Now, think with me: if the shampoo is made to dissolve grease and clean, so it cannot be used to moisturize and leave your hair soft, right? One thing is opposite to the other. Shampoo, being abrasive and corrosive, is not suitable for treat your hair. So far so good, right? Shampoo was made to dissolve grease and remove dirt, not to treat your hair.

How to use shampoo correctly

Here begins a turning point for you: if the shampoo removes hydration and fat, and if what we want is to have hydrated and silky hair, why are you applying shampoo on the hair (on the shaft, that is, on the length of the hair) if the hair lenght does not produce fat?

This thing about rubbing shampoo into your hair damages them. The thread becomes more and more weakened and brittle. Shampoo should only be applied to the scalp, which is where sebum production occurs by the sebaceous glands “But, Júlia, will my hair be clean if I apply shampoo only on the scalp?” Yes, it will be. And I invite you to test it, because that's how you will use the shampoo from now on. The shampoo is designed to be applied to the scalp. And I know right now you're wondering: “Okay, I understand that the hair has no fat and that so I shouldn't use detergent there. But… what about dirt and dust from everyday life? How then will I clean the hair ends? Simple: the foam that runs through your hair in the The moment you rinse the shampoo is more than enough to clean the shaft and the hair. In the moment that you rinse your hair, it becomes completely clean.

So, the correct way to apply the shampoo is by putting a little in one hand, taking small portions with the other hand and applying directly to the scalp. Take it, apply it. Take it, apply it… Apply shampoo all over the scalp. After this, massage the entire scalp well (you can use a scalp brush) and rinse. You can repeat this entire procedure 2 or 3 times, until you feel like your hair is clean. Speaking of rinsing, I also have something important to add here. It is essential that you rinse your hair VERY well. And my instruction is that, from now on, you stay for 4 to 5 minutes leaving the water fall in abundance, at the same time as it opens the hair so that all the foam comes out. And this is very serious!

We think our hair is shampoo-free when, in fact, he is still storing a lot of product there inside. This is very harmful to the health of your hair.

Why are there so many varieties of shampoo?

Another important point is the sensorial sensation that the shampoo provides. In other words, there are shampoos that leave the hair very rigid and are even more difficult to apply, while others bring a greater sensation of softness and ease by massaging the scalp, providing a more pleasant experience. This is because shampoos that are softer when applied contain humectant and conditioning components which improve the sliding of the product during application. However, this does not mean that this type of shampoo is better or provides hydration, even make your hair softer. This factor is related only to the sensory. In fact, this type of shampoo is often harmful to hair, as silicones and conditioning agents can hinder or even prevent conditioner or mask from working properly after washing.

“Okay, Julia, I understand. But what about micellar shampoo? Is it better or is it a myth?

You see: the micelle occurs when fat droplets are trapped by the detergent. This is called emulsification. This way, all shampoos can be considered micellars, do you agree? If the micelle is the removal of fat and that is exactly the function of shampoo, so all shampoos are micellar. So if you were using a micellar shampoo because you believed it had some other specific function, now you've just learned that it doesn't make sense to pay more for a shampoo just because it has the name “micellar” on the label. At this point, it is important that you know that the label of the shampoo was designed to sell the product. Name strategies and “extra functions” are used there to attract your attention and make you buy it . What is written on the label is not always a benefit real for your hair. Moisturizing shampoo, shampoo detox, reconstructive shampoo, anti-frizz shampoo, shampoo with a pool of amino acids or with a pool of proteins… These are all tempting promises that can pique your interest and make you pay more. But remember: the function of shampoo is to clean. And that's it.

The 3 types of shampoos

What differentiates one shampoo from another is the level of abrasiveness, that is, how corrosive it is or is not. We have 3 types of shampoos: very abrasive (for very oily hair ), with medium abrasiveness (for medium oiliness) and low abrasives (for hair with little oil or dry). Therefore, I advise that, if you notice that the shampoo chosen is more abrasive than necessary for your type of scalp, you apply an amount smaller amount of product or even dilute some of it in a separate bottle at the time of use. This will make the shampoo softer. “What if the shampoo is less abrasive compared to what Does my hair need it?” In this case, you will apply the shampoo 2 to 3 times, always rinsing very well.

The 3 types of scalp “And how will I know if my scalp needs theshampoo level 1, 2 or 3 in relation to abrasiveness?”

This will be defined according to the oiliness that your scalp presents or with the frequency of washing of your hair. Inside your scalp, there are sebaceous glands, responsible for the production of sebum, that fat or oil that protects skin and hair. However, there are people who produce a lot of sebum, there are people who produce sebum at an average (or normal) level and there are people who produce little sebum. And it is from the understanding of your level of production of sebum that you will choose which shampoo is most suitable for your needs. Level 1 scalp is the scalp that produces little oiliness. The person can easily remain 5 to 7 days without washing your hair. Here the indication is use abrasive level 1 shampoo, that is, with lower cleaning power. Level 2 scalp produces oil within the normal. The person can stay calmly for up to 3 days without washing your hair. In this case, shampoo with level 2 abrasiveness must be used, that is, with cleaning medium power. Level 3 scalp is the scalp that produces lots of oil. The person feels the need to wash hair every day or almost every day. It must be abrasive level 3 shampoo was applied, that is, with greater cleaning power, and I'll teach you how to identify that.

Before explaining how you will identify the level of abrasiveness of the shampoo, I need to emphasize that, if you buy shampoo with a higher level of abrasiveness, just dilute a little of this shampoo with water, in a separate container. Or, if it's the opposite and you buy a shampoo with a lower level of abrasiveness, just repeat the hair washing process, washing it for 2 or 3 times.

How to identify the level of abrasiveness of the shampoo? Now you will know how to identify the level of abrasiveness shampoo, but don't worry too much about it, because later on I will make a post here with suggestions for shampoo and all the items we will talk about here in this series to make it easier when choosing your products. Whenever there is the sulfosuccinate item in the composition of the shampoo, the abrasiveness is level 1. Whenever you have the lauryl ether item, the abrasiveness is level two. Whenever you have the lauryl sulfate item, the abrasiveness is level 3.

[mariacallous]

In the context of a turbulent and unsatisfying three years in office, the incredibly awful September in progress might rank as the three-party German government’s grimmest month yet. After elections in the east that issued record results for the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party—another vote, in Brandenburg, looms on Sept. 22—the government is also reeling from the fallout of two Islamist terrorist attacks that left three dead and eight wounded. One of those attacks involved a Syrian asylum-seeker whose petition for protection in Germany had been denied; he had links to the fundamentalist Islamic State, which claimed responsibility for the attack.

Now the government has announced its response: starting on Sept. 16, Germany will unilaterally impose border closures, for six months, on all nine of its borders with other European countries. Incoming foreign nationals will be screened according to arbitrary criteria, and rejected applicants will be forced onto Germany’s next-door neighbors.

Although some details remain unclear, Germany’s plan amounts to an unprecedented step. Eight of the neighboring countries are EU members, and all of them are part of the Schengen regime that guarantees freedom of movement across borders within the bloc and recognizes the right to political asylum. Meanwhile, Germany’s mainstream opposition party is demanding an even more severe policy—one that would essentially prevent the country from accepting any new asylum applicants onto its territory at all.

“Until we achieve strong protection of the EU’s external borders with the new common European asylum system, we must strengthen controls at our national borders,” said Germany’s interior minister, Nancy Faeser. Her proposal involves expedited procedures at the German frontiers to determine whether each person who arrives may enter and apply for political asylum.

According to Faeser, the planned border screenings will limit illegal migration and “protect against the acute dangers posed by Islamist terrorism and serious crime.” There will be more deportations during this period, she said, but they will conform to EU law. But some experts disagree. European law expert Alberto Alemanno, a professor of European law at HEC Paris, told the Guardian that the German controls “represent a manifestly disproportionate breach of the principle of free movement within the Schengen area.”

And Sergio Carrera, a research fellow at the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), a Brussels-based think tank, told Foreign Policy that the border closures will most probably have a knock-on effect across the continent: “There’s the risk of these measures triggering a race to the bottom. Where’s the end point? We’re talking about rights that go to the very heart of what the EU is all about.”

The new measures at the German borders ratchet up pressure on European Union norms that are already strained. According to EU law, free movement within the bloc is guaranteed within the Schengen area, which encompasses most EU member countries (except Cyprus and Ireland) as well as Switzerland and Norway. Foreign nationals claiming political persecution have the right to apply for political protection in the country through which they enter the EU. But the bloc’s member countries may suspend Schengen’s guarantees in the case of “internal security concerns” as long as those concerns are proportional and legitimate and the suspensions temporary. Brussels must be briefed in advance.

Germany has had periodic border checks in place along the Austrian border since 2015—a response to the refugee crisis of 2015-16. Last year, in response to heightened migration flows, Germany established checks on its borders shared with Poland, the Czech Republic, and Switzerland. In fact, across the European Union, member states have temporarily restricted internal border crossings 404 times since 2015, according to German daily Die Tageszeitung.

Germany’s move would take another step toward turning the exception policy of internal EU border checks into the rule, argued Christian Jacob of Die Tageszeitung. A European Parliament study issued last year claimed that this was already happening and that a “systematic lack of compliance with EU law” could undermine rule of law guarantees.

One result would almost certainly be a chain reaction across the bloc. Walter Turnowsky, a migration expert at Denmark’s Der Nordschleswiger, a German-language newspaper, fears exactly this. “Officially, the announced German border controls are also temporary, but ultimately the announcement means the end of free travel across the EU,” he said. “From now on, governments will claim: ‘Well, Germany controls its borders too,’” so they will do the same.

The new German measures aim to stop non-EU citizens who have already applied for asylum elsewhere in the bloc from entering Germany by bus, train, or car from Schengen zone neighbors. (Currently, only third-country nationals who have invalid papers or don’t intend to file for political asylum are refused entry.) Under the new measures, the migrants would be returned to the country where they entered the Schengen area and originally applied for asylum, which are usually one of the EU’s southern external border countries, such as Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, or Spain.

German border guards would detain the foreign nationals at the border—perhaps even in a kind of jail, apparently for no longer than five weeks—until their status can be verified. Foreign nationals who had not previously applied for asylum but who claim political persecution could then enter Germany and apply for protection, which German courts would rule on at a later date.

One of the looming questions is what criteria German police would invoke to screen those parties interested in entering the country. Since not every person traveling into Germany can be stopped, “it will be people who look different, regardless of citizenship,” said Carrera, of CEPS. “A certain racial appearance will make some people suspect. This is racial profiling, and it is illegal.”

Against the background of its fierce battle in eastern Germany with the AfD, Germany’s conservative opposition, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), has opted to steal the other party’s thunder by endorsing measures very much like those of the far right—and until recently entirely taboo. Claiming that the government’s measures do not go nearly far enough, the CDU argues that no people—none at all—should be permitted to enter Germany in the absence of a visa or European passport.

This would de facto end the country’s commitment to offering asylum. In order to make this flagrant violation of international law at least appear to conform to EU regulations, under the CDU plan, Germany would declare a state of emergency as a result of internal security threats. This, the CDU believes, would legalize the across-the-board rejection of unwanted third-country nationals.

The proposal also goes a gigantic step beyond the limitation of movement in the EU, effectively eviscerating the right to political asylum.

“This kind of measure, and those the government are taking, will be investigated and could come before the EU court of justice,” Carrera said. “The EU will determine whether the security concerns really justify such a breach of EU law.” Other experts have said that Germany will not be able to prove that the recent attacks or the numbers of asylum-seekers—which have fallen this year—actually threaten the state’s internal security and thus justify (or indeed, are really aided by) these measures.

One of the many problems with the new German modus operandi: Neighboring states will have to accept people refused by Germany back onto their territory—and Austria, for one, which has general elections on Sept. 29 (and where polls indicate the situation for migrants is getting even worse, with a very strong showing of the far-right Freedom Party likely) said forget it, it won’t take them.

Poland is also up arms at the prospect of traffic jams at the borders that would obstruct commercial and private transportation. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk called the German move a “de facto suspension of the Schengen Agreement on a large scale.”

The Belgian daily Le Soir seems to hit the nail on the head: “With governments like this, there’s no need for the far right to be in power. The pressure of elections and the fear of extremes are causing those in power to run around like headless chickens, with migrants as the only means for decompression.”

EU expert Thu Nguyen, the deputy director of the Berlin-based Jacques Delors Centre, told Foreign Policy that unilateral decisions taken by Germany—the EU’s most populous state—are entirely unproductive. She noted that the EU’s Pact on Migration and Asylum, a set of new rules passed this year for managing migration and establishing a common asylum system at a bloc-wide level, addresses some of the concerns about immigration raised by Germany and other EU states, including by facilitating faster procedures for asylum applicants at the continent’s external borders.

After all, Germany—including the CDU’s parliamentary group in the EU, the European People’s Party (EPP)—was essential in drafting the pact, together with the 25 other EU member states. When the pact came in front of the European Parliament earlier this year, EPP parliamentarian Tomas Tobé said that “the absolute best way to help support a European migration policy is to be loyal to the whole migration pact.”

[attorneysinphuket]

Thai Marriage Visa

If you're planning to marry a Thai citizen and make your home in Thailand, you'll need to obtain a Thai marriage visa. This visa allows you to enter and reside in Thailand for a specific period, usually 90 days. However, you can extend your stay and eventually apply for a permanent residence visa.

Eligibility Requirements

To qualify for a Thai marriage visa, you must meet the following criteria:

Marriage Certificate: You must provide a valid marriage certificate issued by a Thai authority.

Passport: Your passport must be valid for at least six months.

Financial Proof: You may need to provide evidence of sufficient financial means to support yourself and your spouse in Thailand. This could include bank statements, employment letters, or property ownership documents.

Health Certificate: A health certificate may be required, especially if you have certain medical conditions.

Application Process

The application process for a Thai marriage visa typically involves the following steps:

Gather Required Documents: Collect all the necessary documents, including your passport, marriage certificate, financial proof, and health certificate.

Submit Application: Visit the nearest Thai embassy or consulate in your country and submit your application along with the required documents.

Interview: You may be required to attend an interview with a visa officer to discuss your relationship and plans for living in Thailand.

Visa Issuance: If your application is approved, the visa will be issued and stamped in your passport.

Extending Your Stay

Once your initial 90-day visa expires, you can apply to extend your stay in Thailand. To do so, you'll need to provide proof of your ongoing relationship with your Thai spouse and evidence that you're still financially stable.

Permanent Residence Visa

After living in Thailand for a certain period, typically five years, you may be eligible to apply for a permanent residence visa. This visa allows you to live and work in Thailand indefinitely.

Additional Considerations

Work Permit: If you plan to work in Thailand, you'll need to obtain a work permit in addition to your marriage visa.

Visa Fees: There are visa fees associated with the application process.

Local Laws and Customs: It's important to familiarize yourself with Thai laws and customs to ensure a smooth transition to life in Thailand.

Conclusion

The Thai marriage visa is a crucial step for individuals who wish to marry a Thai citizen and live in Thailand. By understanding the eligibility requirements, application process, and extension procedures, you can increase your chances of a successful application and a fulfilling life in Thailand.

[jjtax]

Understanding Tax Refunds: JJ Tax made it easy

Handling tax refunds can seem overwhelming, but having a clear grasp of the process can make it straightforward. This newsletter aims to demystify tax refunds by covering key aspects: eligibility criteria, claiming procedures and tracking your refund status.

What is a Tax Refund?

A tax refund represents the amount returned to taxpayers who have overpaid their taxes over the fiscal year. This situation arises when the total tax deducted or paid exceeds the actual tax liability determined based on their income.

In India, tax payments are made through TDS (Tax Deducted at Source), advance tax, or self-assessment tax. When the total tax paid or deducted surpasses your tax liability as calculated in your Income Tax Return (ITR), the excess amount is refunded. This mechanism ensures taxpayers are reimbursed for any overpayments.

Who is Eligible for a Tax Refund?

Eligibility for a tax refund depends on various factors:

Excess Tax Payments If your TDS or advance tax payments exceed your tax liability, you’re eligible for a refund. This often applies to salaried employees, freelancers, and individuals with taxable investment income.

Claiming Deductions If you claim deductions under sections like 80C, 80D, etc., and these deductions lower your tax liability below the total tax paid, a refund may be due.

Filing an Income Tax Return Only those who file their Income Tax Return can claim a refund. The return must accurately reflect your income, deductions, and tax payments to establish if a refund is warranted.

Losses to Set Off If you have losses from previous years or the current year that can be carried forward and set off against current year income, you might be eligible for a refund if these losses reduce your tax liability.

Who is Not Eligible for a Tax Refund?

Certain situations or individuals may not qualify for a tax refund:

Income Below Taxable Threshold If your total income is below the taxable limit, a refund may not be applicable.

Salary Below Government Criteria Individuals earning below the minimum threshold specified by the Government of India may not qualify for a refund.

No Overpayment If your tax payments match your tax liability or you haven’t overpaid, a refund will not be available.

Non-Filers or Incorrect Filers Those who fail to file their Income Tax Return or file it incorrectly will not be eligible for a refund. Proper filing is essential for initiating the refund process.

Invalid Deductions Claims for deductions that do not meet tax regulations or lack valid documentation may result in a refund rejection.

Incorrect Bank Details If the bank account information provided in your ITR is incorrect or incomplete, the refund may not be processed.

How to Claim Your Tax Refund

Here’s a step-by-step guide to claiming your tax refund:

File Your Income Tax Return (ITR) Access the Income Tax Department’s e-filing portal. Choose the correct ITR form based on your income sources and eligibility. Accurately complete all required details, including income, deductions, and tax payments.

Verify Your ITR Verify your ITR using Aadhaar OTP, net banking, or by sending a signed ITR-V to the Centralised Processing Centre (CPC). Verification must be completed within 120 days of filing your ITR.

ITR Processing The Income Tax Department will process your return, assess your tax liability, and determine the refund amount. This process can take a few weeks to several months.

Refund Issuance After processing, the refund will be credited directly to your bank account. Ensure your bank details are accurate and up-to-date in your ITR.

Update Bank Account Details (if needed) If your bank details change after filing your ITR, promptly update them on the e-filing portal to ensure correct refund crediting.

How to Check Your ITR Refund Status for FY 2024-2025

To check your refund status, follow these steps:

Visit the Income Tax E-Filing Portal Go to the official Income Tax Department e-filing website.

Access the 'Refund Status' Section Navigate to the ‘Refund Status’ page, typically under the ‘Services’ tab or a similar heading.

Enter Required Details Input your PAN (Permanent Account Number) and the assessment year for your filed return.

Review the Status The portal will show the status of your refund, including whether it has been processed, approved, or if further action is needed.

Track Refund Processing Keep an eye on any updates or notifications from the Income Tax Department regarding your refund.

Understanding the tax refund process can simplify the experience. By following these steps and staying informed about your eligibility, you can make sure that you have a smooth process and quickly receipt of any excess tax payments. For expert guidance and personalized assistance, consult with JJ Tax. Visit our website or contact us today to get the support you need for all your tax-related queries.

JJ Tax

[theconstitutionisgayculture]

"I have both autism and EDS, yet despite this my quality of life is not bad. If I lived in Canada I would have been forced into euthanasia against my will." That's simply a lie and that's not how MAID works at all.

Ahem.

No specific type of mental disorder is excluded from qualifying for a medically assisted death.

Like physical illnesses, a person asking for MAiD must be found by assessors to have a "grievous and irremediable" medical condition -- meaning a serious and incurable illness, disease or disability in an advanced state of irreversible decline with intolerable suffering.

In countries like Belgium and the Netherlands, which have allowed assisted dying for mental disorders for two decades, requests are made by people suffering from a variety of psychiatric conditions including: depression and other mood disorders, PTSD, schizophrenia, psychotic disorders, neurodevelopmental disorders like autism and personality disorders like borderline personality disorder.

And

On March 9, 2023, legislation to extend the temporary exclusion of eligibility for persons suffering solely from a mental illness received Royal Assent and immediately came into force. As a result, persons suffering solely from a mental illness and who meet all other eligibility criteria will now be eligible for MAID in Canada as of March 17, 2024. This extension will allow additional time to complete and disseminate key resources currently under development for clinicians and other health care system partners to address these more complex MAID requests. The extension will also provide more time to consider the parliamentary Special Joint Committee on MAID’s interim and final reports.

The following procedural safeguards apply to persons whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable:

request for MAID must be made in writing: a written request must be signed by one independent witness, and it must be made after the person is informed that they have a “grievous and irremediable medical condition.” (a paid professional personal or health care worker can be an independent witness)

two independent doctors or nurse practitioners must provide an assessment and confirm that all of the eligibility requirements are met

the person must be informed that they can withdraw their request at any time, in any manner

the person must be given an opportunity to withdraw consent and must expressly confirm their consent immediately before receiving MAIDD (however, this “final consent” requirement can be waived in certain circumstances)

Note: the requirement for a minimum 10-day reflection period is now removed. This means that individuals whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable no longer have to wait 10 days between the approval of their MAID request and receiving MAID.

Now, the part you're going to quote back to me from the second link is this:

The following procedural safeguards apply to persons’ whose natural death is not reasonably foreseeable (*indicates safeguards specific to those requests):

request for MAID must be made in writing: a written request must be signed by one independent witness, and it must be made after the person is informed that they have a “grievous and irremediable medical condition” (a paid professional personal or health care worker can be an independent witness)

two independent doctors or nurse practitioners must provide an assessment and confirm that all of the eligibility requirements are met

*if neither of the two practitioners who assesses eligibility has expertise in the medical condition that is causing the person’s suffering, they must consult with a practitioner who has such expertise

the person must be informed that they can withdraw their request at any time, in any manner

*the person must be informed of available and appropriate means to relieve their suffering, including counselling services, mental health and disability support services, community services, and palliative care, and must be offered consultations with professionals who provide those services

*the person and the practitioners must have discussed reasonable and available means to relieve the person’s suffering, and agree that the person has seriously considered those means

*the eligibility assessments must take at least 90 days, but this period can be shortened if the person is about to lose the capacity to make health care decisions, as long as both assessments have been completed

immediately before MAID is provided, the practitioner must give the person an opportunity to withdraw their request and ensure that they give express consent

To which I'm going to say: Canada has a long history of ignoring written law when it comes to the rights of Canadians. They constantly trample on free speech and the free press, even though the Charter of Rights and Freedoms states:

Fundamental Freedoms

Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: (a) freedom of conscience and religion; (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and (d) freedom of association.

The Canadian government also still oppresses First Nations peoples even though the charter says:

Equality Rights 15.(1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

Canada, especially Canada under Trudeau, does not follow its own laws. The scenario that you outline in your quote is going to happen under MAID. There are already multiple accounts of people being pressured into MAID, even though that's not supposed to happen. It's only going to get worse from here.