#no medical exemption no press exemption

[taviamoth]

🚨 IOF soldiers directly opened fire on journalists, including the Al-Jazeera press crew, during the ongoing invasion of #Jenin, which is approaching its third day.

Al-Jazeera reports that its crew's hotel is currently besieged by the IOF. A worker at the hotel where journalists are staying was wounded by IOF gunfire, and the IOF has demolished the guard room of the hotel.

At this moment, the IOF is sending reinforcements towards the hotel where press crews are staying.

[odinsblog]

One of the most durable myths in recent history is that the religious right, the coalition of conservative evangelicals and fundamentalists, emerged as a political movement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion. The tale goes something like this: Evangelicals, who had been politically quiescent for decades, were so morally outraged by Roe that they resolved to organize in order to overturn it.

This myth of origins is oft repeated by the movement’s leaders. In his 2005 book, Jerry Falwell, the firebrand fundamentalist preacher, recounts his distress upon reading about the ruling in the Jan. 23, 1973, edition of the Lynchburg News: “I sat there staring at the Roe v. Wade story,” Falwell writes, “growing more and more fearful of the consequences of the Supreme Court’s act and wondering why so few voices had been raised against it.” Evangelicals, he decided, needed to organize.

Some of these anti- Roe crusaders even went so far as to call themselves “new abolitionists,” invoking their antebellum predecessors who had fought to eradicate slavery.

But the abortion myth quickly collapses under historical scrutiny. In fact, it wasn’t until 1979—a full six years after Roe—that evangelical leaders, at the behest of conservative activist Paul Weyrich, seized on abortion not for moral reasons, but as a rallying-cry to deny President Jimmy Carter a second term. Why? Because the anti-abortion crusade was more palatable than the religious right’s real motive: protecting segregated schools. So much for the new abolitionism.

Today, evangelicals make up the backbone of the pro-life movement, but it hasn’t always been so. Both before and for several years after Roe, evangelicals were overwhelmingly indifferent to the subject, which they considered a “Catholic issue.” In 1968, for instance, a symposium sponsored by the Christian Medical Society and Christianity Today, the flagship magazine of evangelicalism, refused to characterize abortion as sinful, citing “individual health, family welfare, and social responsibility” as justifications for ending a pregnancy. In 1971, delegates to the Southern Baptist Convention in St. Louis, Missouri, passed a resolution encouraging “Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother.” The convention, hardly a redoubt of liberal values, reaffirmed that position in 1974, one year after Roe, and again in 1976.

When the Roe decision was handed down, W. A. Criswell, the Southern Baptist Convention’s former president and pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas, Texas—also one of the most famous fundamentalists of the 20th century—was pleased: “I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person,” he said, “and it has always, therefore, seemed to me that what is best for the mother and for the future should be allowed.”

Although a few evangelical voices, including Christianity Today magazine, mildly criticized the ruling, the overwhelming response was silence, even approval. Baptists, in particular, applauded the decision as an appropriate articulation of the division between church and state, between personal morality and state regulation of individual behavior. “Religious liberty, human equality and justice are advanced by the Supreme Court abortion decision,” wrote W. Barry Garrett of Baptist Press.

So what then were the real origins of the religious right? It turns out that the movement can trace its political roots back to a court ruling, but not Roe v. Wade.

In May 1969, a group of African-American parents in Holmes County, Mississippi, sued the Treasury Department to prevent three new whites-only K-12 private academies from securing full tax-exempt status, arguing that their discriminatory policies prevented them from being considered “charitable” institutions. The schools had been founded in the mid-1960s in response to the desegregation of public schools set in motion by the Brown v. Board of Education decision of 1954. In 1969, the first year of desegregation, the number of white students enrolled in public schools in Holmes County dropped from 771 to 28; the following year, that number fell to zero.

In Green v. Kennedy (David Kennedy was secretary of the treasury at the time), decided in January 1970, the plaintiffs won a preliminary injunction, which denied the “segregation academies” tax-exempt status until further review. In the meantime, the government was solidifying its position on such schools. Later that year, President Richard Nixon ordered the Internal Revenue Service to enact a new policy denying tax exemptions to all segregated schools in the United States. Under the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which forbade racial segregation and discrimination, discriminatory schools were not—by definition—“charitable” educational organizations, and therefore they had no claims to tax-exempt status; similarly, donations to such organizations would no longer qualify as tax-deductible contributions.

On June 30, 1971, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued its ruling in the case, now Green v. Connally (John Connally had replaced David Kennedy as secretary of the Treasury). The decision upheld the new IRS policy: “Under the Internal Revenue Code, properly construed, racially discriminatory private schools are not entitled to the Federal tax exemption provided for charitable, educational institutions, and persons making gifts to such schools are not entitled to the deductions provided in case of gifts to charitable, educational institutions.”

Paul Weyrich, the late religious conservative political activist and co-founder of the Heritage Foundation, saw his opening.

In the decades following World War II, evangelicals, especially white evangelicals in the North, had drifted toward the Republican Party—inclined in that direction by general Cold War anxieties, vestigial suspicions of Catholicism and well-known evangelist Billy Graham’s very public friendship with Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon. Despite these predilections, though, evangelicals had largely stayed out of the political arena, at least in any organized way. If he could change that, Weyrich reasoned, their large numbers would constitute a formidable voting bloc—one that he could easily marshal behind conservative causes.

“The new political philosophy must be defined by us [conservatives] in moral terms, packaged in non-religious language, and propagated throughout the country by our new coalition,” Weyrich wrote in the mid-1970s. “When political power is achieved, the moral majority will have the opportunity to re-create this great nation.” Weyrich believed that the political possibilities of such a coalition were unlimited. “The leadership, moral philosophy, and workable vehicle are at hand just waiting to be blended and activated,” he wrote. “If the moral majority acts, results could well exceed our wildest dreams.”

But this hypothetical “moral majority” needed a catalyst—a standard around which to rally. For nearly two decades, Weyrich, by his own account, had been trying out different issues, hoping one might pique evangelical interest: pornography, prayer in schools, the proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution, even abortion. “I was trying to get these people interested in those issues and I utterly failed,” Weyrich recalled at a conference in 1990.

The Green v. Connally ruling provided a necessary first step: It captured the attention of evangelical leaders , especially as the IRS began sending questionnaires to church-related “segregation academies,” including Falwell’s own Lynchburg Christian School, inquiring about their racial policies. Falwell was furious. “In some states,” he famously complained, “It’s easier to open a massage parlor than a Christian school.”

One such school, Bob Jones University—a fundamentalist college in Greenville, South Carolina—was especially obdurate. The IRS had sent its first letter to Bob Jones University in November 1970 to ascertain whether or not it discriminated on the basis of race. The school responded defiantly: It did not admit African Americans.

Although Bob Jones Jr., the school’s founder, argued that racial segregation was mandated by the Bible, Falwell and Weyrich quickly sought to shift the grounds of the debate, framing their opposition in terms of religious freedom rather than in defense of racial segregation. For decades, evangelical leaders had boasted that because their educational institutions accepted no federal money (except for, of course, not having to pay taxes) the government could not tell them how to run their shops—whom to hire or not, whom to admit or reject.

The Civil Rights Act, however, changed that calculus.

(continue reading)

[audisive]

♪ LET THE LIGHT IN.

౨ৎ simon 'ghost' riley | reader

synopsis: the mixture of love and hate is a dangerous, but ghost is no stranger to danger.

tags: angst, little bit of comfort, enemies to lovers (?), ghost is a blind bastard as well as stupid, mention of being suicidal (but not really), hate is mistaken for love, mention of unconsented touching

     Hate is a familiar word, ever the old friend. Strong and heavy. It's what fuels him and keeps him going – his strength, both a blessing and a curse. Hate, hate, hate. Ghost hates you; you drive him to hell and back with your word until the thin line between hospitality and hostility blurs and he steps over the other.

There's an old red monster that constantly crawls under his skin, corrupting his brain and his heart. Hatred consumes him at the sight of you. Ghost hates you. At least that's what he thinks.

Fleeting gazes are mistaken for heated glares, tensed jaw an unbreakable habit. There's a fire in his loins when your eye catches his at the right time. Ghost's heart speeds up because you make his blood pressure rise. His guts are twisted and turned to your accommodation without knowing, you're in his thoughts constantly because you're so awful.

Love and hate is black and white, color him blind. There's a fine line between the opposites, and he's ambivalent about you.

Of course he respects you; you're his teammate, – a remarkable one, at that – and he will trust you with his life and his heart in your hands, but as much as possible, he would prefer not having to.

Maybe ye're just no' inta women, LT. It's not that he hasn't considered it; can't help that he stares a little too long at anyone with bright blue eyes as engrossing as— Fuckin' 'ell, Johnny. Or perhaps his own were too dull, too icy, too bland. He lacked his sergeant's passion for nearly everything. A'm just pullin' yer leg.

Oh, but how Simon loves you.

Simon is familiar to you the same way the desert is familiar with the scorching heat of the sun, and despite how it warms you, kisses and burns and scars you, you miss every bit of it – the way he hurts you comfortingly. Loving him feels like snow meeting sand, – unfamiliar and impossible – but if snow can fall on the hottest desert, then who are you to be exempt?

Acknowledging the difference between love and hate is one, admitting that he doesn't feel the other way for you is another. It's not love; you're just part of the team. He repeats the mantra when his fist collides with the face of a man who made the mistake of touching you despite your lack of consent.

Your knuckles are split, sir. He repeats it to himself again when he's forced to sit with his thigh pressed to yours and feels the warmth of your skin against his. I can take care of m'self next time, Ghost.

I know, kid. It's not love. Not when he hushes you instead of yelling and barking orders at you as you bleed out on the floor of the warehouse. "Ghost," you plead for your life, weeping and gasping for air. Your voice breaks. His heart does, too. "I know, lovie. I know." It's not love. Not when he carries you singlehandedly in and out of the chopper, rushing to the medical ward before you can even lose consciousness. Not when he tends to the knife on your side before the bullet in his.

"Sure, the lieutenant isn't much for words, but the way he looks at you..." The knowledgeable (or maybe she just likes gossip) nurse trails off, searching for the right words in the back of her mind. "It's like there's no one else in the world but you – no, actually, he looks at you as if you're the world itself – he looks at you like a god, his. In a way that guarantees anyone that he'd live and repeat the horrors of this life in his next, just for you. And I've never seen him look at anyone like.. that. But now, I see him looking at you. Everyday."

She smiles at you, kind enough to continue. "Don't you think you deserve that kind of dedication? The kind that makes you feel like you're the center of someone's universe?"

You find yourself stunned by her words, your lips parting in the slightest manner. Speechless. She finds more words in your silence. "'Cause I think you do. You do deserve that," she smiles at you knowingly, as if she'd read your fate – as if the stars had told her all there is to know, "and something tells me he could give you exactly that." She's sure of it. 

But Simon is only the ghost of a Ghost. He's fleeting, a glance, a graze, and a kiss.

Too early, too much, not enough, too late. He'd used up every excuse like a box of tissues until he had none, until he'd been left high and dry, until he had no choice but to admit it: he's in love with you in a way that is looked down upon. Desperately, longingly, and horribly so.

If your love was a noose, then Simon is a suicidal man. He wants your love to dig into the skin of his neck, and please take his breath away.

The image of you leaving was embedded into his brain, the same way he had burned the image of you into his mind long ago. His tongue dries with the words and pleads of love, but he thinks he doesn't. So he doesn't. He wants to call out to you – say something that might cause you to pause and turn around, maybe take him with you – but the words don't come, and you leave, taking his heart with you. 

There's a longing that aches beneath his chest, an empty space.

All of the words in the world will not change the reality that he pushed himself into. Life has moved on without the two of you. He has so many things to tell you, but now is not the time.

He calls for your name.

Your breath hitches at his voice before you speak, "good night, lieutenant." You open a barrier between you and him just as you open the door, taking a step out of the seemingly unlived small apartment. His chest is unmoving as an unfamiliar feeling shoots through his veins. He should say something, anything. Say something, bastard.

With lowered pride, his mouth opens just a second too late. He hears the door click shut.

It never will be.

  divider by @cafekitsune !

[weaselle]

@biggyb I wanted to answer you and then it became so much that i felt it needed to be it's own post.

So, if it was enacted on a large or ubiquitous scale, that is absolutely a concern, that if everybody had more money prices would just increase, rendering the UBI useless.

what would we do about that?

One the one hand that is basically already what happens anyway, which is why cost of living increases etc are a thing. And on the other hand there are a few mechanisms that can curb that, things like rent control laws.

But ultimately, personally, i believe the real answer is to remove the money aspect and provide the basic necessities directly.

When we say UBI we’re basically talking about the government giving us money (which has to come from somewhere, and that probably means some kind of progressive wealth tax, which is really just wealth redistribution at that point but whatever)

Anyway I believe it would be more effective for the government to provide those things directly (but not exclusively). I believe the baseline for society is everybody has free access to:

HEALTHCARE

All forms of healthcare (this is an important one, the very best we can do should be available to anyone who needs it, with no conditions, no barriers to entry like complicated paperwork, if you need health care you should get it, period.

INFORMATION

This means a free press, and education, true, but i also mean internet access, which at this point in our society i think is necessary for equality

NUTRITION

So, not just food, but a complete diet. This can still be very basic, little more than rice and beans, with medical exemption options of course, but it can be enough that it is the bare minimum food types, maybe rice beans and a couple types of dark green veggie and a couple types of vitamin C fruit. Possibly eggs or peanuts or something. Nothing fancy, just good quality ingredients that contain enough nutrition to keep you not only alive but fully healthy. And i think this should be provided in both raw ingredient form and cooked form.

CLOTHING

This one gets overlooked a lot, but kids need shoes, and struggling people need blankets and jackets, and everybody needs access to clothes, actually. Again, can be very basic, maybe government issued overalls, socks, jackets, blankets, and some kind of cheap tennis shoes would be most of it, but everybody needs access to clothes.

And finally HOUSING

So for example, the government would build apartment complexes that were just freely available to the public, first come first serve, you sign for it and the apartment is yours until you give it up or take another apartment.

We already have our government building and running public schools and libraries, we just need to upgrade those a bit. We already have governments building and running hospitals, we just need to do a lot more of that a lot better and get these private insurance companies to fuck off.

And then we just need to provide the clothes, open the Food Distribution Centers and build the housing.

Because then it won’t be money, so you don’t have to worry about the prices of everything going up because everybody has more income, which you are correct, is a concern. So just provide those things directly.

This is much less like taking money from the super wealthy and putting it into the bank accounts of everyone else, and much more the way taxes are supposed to work taking money from those that can spare it and using it to build a society that is better for everyone - even improving things for those super wealthy people (who now at the very least get to walk around safer from the sick and the homeless and the desperate - i mean violent crime alone would probably do whatever the opposite of sky-rocket is. Ground-dive.)

And people will still get jobs and spend money! Like, just because you provide government overalls, doesn’t mean people will stop wanting fashion brands. But now nobody will die of exposure from not having clothes. Same with everything, for example, the government school system is extremely developed, but there are still private schools, right?

That would be true of all this. If you gave everyone access to basic nutrition, there would still be steak houses and sushi restaurants and stuff. But now you could actually have the public boycott foods they felt were sourced unethically, or you could, say, regulate the fishing industry into sustainability even if that meant fish became so expensive that the average person could only eat fish once a year or whatever. Businesses might die from it, but no people would. Not even the people who used to own those businesses.

For my money, no money is where it’s at. But UBI would be a nice stepping stone.

What UBI experiments show us is that when you give people money and they DON’T get a job, but just exist at the minimum level, they are usually only doing so to accomplish something like go back to school for a degree or take care of a disabled or elderly loved one.

And the same would be true if we just provided everyone with the basics (except healthcare, everybody must get the best we have when it comes to healthcare, anything else is a moral failing that doesn’t bear contemplating)

but yeah, there would be people who would only wear government issued overalls, only live in government barracks, and only eat government rice and beans… but UBI experiments show us that it would be a small percentage of the population, and they'd only be doing it either to accomplish something worthy, or because they were in some way impaired. 90% of everyone else would still be out there getting jobs so they could move into a nice house and eat fish, but now with the security to quit if those jobs didn’t treat them well!

imo, THAT’s how you fix the economic issues surrounding UBI, you take the “income” out of the equation and you just straight up provide the Universal Basics themselves.

"but how would we build all these apartments and run these food distribution centers?"

well, this dovetails into my other favorite solution for the united states.

See, we spend a FUCKTON on the military, and we're just never going to make that stop happening, apparently.

So I say, we INCREASE the military. I say double it even.

And then we use them here, keeping them sharp and employed and trained etc by doing public works.

The military is already full of engineers and cooks and doctors and electricians and forklift operators and everything else.

So get them building apartments and running food distribution and supplementing hospital staffs etc.

All that stuff involves, logistics, and teamwork, and knowing how to run projects and accomplish missions, it's all good training even for the combat personnel, which is only 15% of the people in the military btw.

The rest are those other jobs i mentioned. So hire and train even more of them, and then deploy them here, repairing bridges and building hospitals and managing clothing warehouses and stuff.

anyway. Food for thought.

[chronicandironic]

Here’s a great resource following all the mask bans going on in the USA. The text below is copied from the post.

Take Action

Wear a mask. To prevent COVID and Long COVID, EVERYONE should be masking in public with good-filtering, close-fitting respirator masks. We are all at risk ourselves, and we all pose risks to other people. So, wear an N95 mask in public spaces. If you are organizing an event – particularly a political event – require and distribute high quality masks for all. If you have stopped masking in public, this is a great time to re-engage the practice. Our opposition to this fascism must be made visible. There is safety in numbers. We keep us safe.

If you live in North Carolina,

Call your state representatives and state senators and use NC Megaphone’s tool to email all the State House and Senate representatives at once. Tell them mask bans are dangerous and unconstitutional.

If you live outside North Carolina, call the Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill Chambers of Commerce. Tell them you will not be traveling to North Carolina so long as they continue to consider mask bans. You can use the NC Megaphone tool above to do the same.

The bill has passed in NC but it wouldn’t hurt to still message your reps, or say you won’t go there.

If you live in Chicago,

Call and email Alderman Lopez who proposed the mask ban there, and your own alderman and tell them that you oppose it in its entirety.

If you live in or frequent New York State,

Call 518-474-8390 (press 1 to leave a message, 2 to speak with a person) and email Governor Hochul to express your opposition to mask bans. If you live in or visit New York City, call and email Mayor Adams to say the same and express why his comments on masking are harmful. Follow @covidadvocacyny for more details

In every state,

Call your own elected officials. Ask if they have heard of any plans to introduce mask bans in your state, and register your dissent. Tell them: “mask bans are a dangerous violation of our rights. We need mask requirements in healthcare, not mask bans which will make public space even more unsafe and inaccessible.”

Forward this message to your community groups and discuss mask bans with your family, friends, and community. Email them at info@peoplescdc.org if you would like more materials.

Background: Politicians are pushing mask bans

In mid June New York Governor Kathy Horchul announced in a CNN interview that she is considering a ban on masking in New York State, following New York City Mayor Eric Adams’s suggestion that protesters should no longer be allowed to protect themselves and others by masking. Hochul’s remark alluded to masked pro-Palestine protesters – marking a new direct connection between anti-public health repression and repression of Palestine solidarity work. This comes just as North Carolina is nearly finished supercharging its law against masking, setting a precedent that is likely to have far-reaching implications for people trying to take care of their health across the United States.

The state of North Carolina has had a law on the books for years that criminalizes mask wearing. In 2020, they correctly amended their rule to include an exemption for “any person wearing a mask for the purpose of ensuring the physical health or safety of others.” However, this exemption is currently being undone. In mid-May, North Carolina’s Senate tried to pass a bill to remove this exemption. In the face of significant public opposition, North Carolina’s House of Representatives rejected the Senate’s version. On June 12, a “compromise” bill that included language ”to ensure that individuals who have legitimate health concerns can wear a surgical or medical-grade mask in public” was passed by both legislatures.

This “compromise” is a bad bill.The changes it introduces do not go far enough to protect individuals’ interest in masking for their health. Other changes actually make this version worse than the previous Senate version of the bill.

The earlier bill entirely removed exemption #6, which protected “any person wearing a mask for the purpose of ensuring the physical health or safety of the wearer or others.” As a “compromise,” the current bill includes exemption #6 but has removed the phrase “for the purpose of ensuring the physical health or safety of the wearer or others.” In its place, the exemption will be for “preventing the spread of contagious disease.” As noted by North Carolina’s legislative counsel, the earlier bill meant that “individuals would no longer be able to wear masks in public for health or safety reasons.” Yet, the new bill, by also removing the “physical health and safety” language, is effectively the same as the earlier bill: individuals will have a more limited ability to wear masks in public.

This is a negation of an important individual right. People have a right to self defense, including a right to protect their health. Such a right is significantly broader than an interest in “preventing the spread of contagious disease.” For example, breathing wildfire smoke is damaging to your health but has nothing to do with contagious disease.

Moreover, the new bill proposes to give every person in North Carolina the legal right to ask those around them to unmask—something we haven’t seen anywhere in the US to-date. Under the 2020 version of North Carolina’s anti-mask law, law enforcement officers could request that people remove their masks in certain situations, even if they were relying on the health and safety exemption. The new bill extends that power, allowing “the owner or occupant of public or private property where the wearer is present” to request that the wearer “temporarily remove” their mask. This rule threatens to amplify the practice of “mask shaming” by giving employers, colleagues, and “occupants of public property” a legal basis for demanding that people wearing medical masks show them their faces. In fact, before the law was even signed, a stage 4 cancer patient at a gas station was intentionally coughed on by another customer, who told her that wearing a mask in public was illegal.

Not only does this rule provide a dangerous ground for harassment, it makes public spaces unsafe for people trying to avoid COVID and other viruses, particularly medically vulnerable people. There is no safe amount of time to unmask, particularly as ventilation conditions and viral load can vary. People may be asked to unmask multiple times, further increasing risk.

As the North Carolina bill is one signature away from becoming law, mask restrictions are now being pushed elsewhere and across party lines, like New York state. Last month, the Ohio Attorney General advised public universities that student protestors who wear masks could be charged with felonies under an archaic anti-mask law. And of course, just this week, the Governor of New York told CNN she was looking into whether the state could reinstate its own 200-year-old anti-masking law, which it had repealed in 2020. Across the country, police have been harassing people wearing masks on campus using a variety of legal justifications.

These legislations and legislative attempts aim to set a new precedent for the right-wing agenda, as evidenced by their attention to ban mask mandates in healthcare in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 document co-signed/supported by hundreds of far-right and Trump-allied organizations. These same repressive forces have made inroads in dismantling reproductive and gender-affirming healthcare options. Their attention is now also focusing on those practicing community care and bodily autonomy by wearing masks.

(I had to copy and paste all the links, which took time, I doubled checked but some might be missing, if the link isn’t correct go to the original post and check there. If you want more links, contact me or google.)

How did we get here?

Although these fascistic mask ban policies have been kick-started by the far-right, many police officials and some elected Democrats, too, are joining team “Far Right” to sacrifice public health at the altar of increased surveillance. Democratic New York City mayor Eric Adams has been urging business owners to require customers to lower their protective medical masks upon entry as a crime-prevention technique, claiming that refusal to unmask “should cause … alarm” and now suggests he favors outright bans on masking in some situations as well. And Democratic Alderman Raymond Lopez of Chicago’s 15th Ward has now submitted a proposal with similar language to the North Caroline bill, to increase penalties on any protesters arrested while wearing a mask. His staff told us that there is no plan to exempt medical masks. Many other Democrats – through silence on this issue and through broader inaction on public health – have helped to institutionalize an anti-public health agenda, reinforce structural ableism, and further isolate anyone who wants to avoid a preventable, still deadly, and often disabling virus.

Not only a terrifying threat to all our health and safety as well as our rights to privacy, mask bans violate our Constitutional rights and the Americans with Disabilities Act. They are an egregious overstep on behalf of right wing forces to erase and to criminalize our efforts to care for ourselves and others. It’s no coincidence that these bans began in the US South, specifically targeting, intimidating, and harming Black, Brown, and Indigenous peoples.

Mask bans also serve short-term corporate interests, which center profits over the lives of workers and consumers. In-N-Out burger publicly banned its employees from wearing masks, seemingly because an inability to “service with a smile” due to mask-wearing meant revenue loss. Hospital chains dangerously removed mask mandates in part due to slowdown in elective procedures caused by COVID testing requirements and mask-wearing policies.

But there is a lot we can do

We all have a responsibility to fight this right-wing agenda, to protect everyone’s right to participate in public life without making ourselves and our community sick. If you have stopped masking, now is a good time to reengage with this practice in public spaces, and particularly in political gatherings. If you are organizing an event, please require and distribute high quality masks for all as visible expression of solidarity.

We must protect our right to health, bodily autonomy, privacy, and political expression.

[covid-safer-hotties]

A Long Island County Banned Masks, and Disabled People Are Suing - Published Aug 23, 2024

Last week, Nassau County, on New York’s Long Island, became the first county in the US to ban the public wearing of masks—with very vague health exemptions—since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. The Nassau ban follows a similarly controversial statewide mask ban in North Carolina that took effect in June.

Several concerns have been raised about Nassau’s mask ban, including that police officers—not experts in public health or medicine—are tasked with determining whether an individual is wearing a mask for valid health reasons. But another is that the pandemic is not over, and wearing medical masks while grocery shopping or even at a protest is meant to limit exposure to the disease—and some residents expect a ban to lead to harassment by local anti-maskers.

The county’s move has prompted the first class-action lawsuit against a mask ban, filed Thursday in federal district court by Disability Rights New York against Nassau County and county executive Bruce Blakeman on behalf of two anonymous residents.

“This mask ban poses a direct threat to public health and discriminates against people with disabilities,” said Timothy A. Clune, the group’s executive director, in a press release.

One of the residents, who lives with cerebral palsy and asthma, said they were stopped and questioned by other residents after the ban was passed—even before it was enacted—and, according to the complaint, now “fears that they will be arrested…because there is no standard for the police to follow to decide if they meet the health exception.”

The other resident represented in the complaint, who masks due to various immune conditions, the complaint says, is now “terrified to go into public wearing a mask.”

Both complainants say that masking has enabled them to participate in public life as disabled people during the ongoing pandemic. Disability Rights NY argues in the suit that the ban as written is unconstitutional, and violates both the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, both key items of federal civil rights legislation, by denying disabled people access to their own communities.

“Local laws that abrogate or curtail rights conferred by federal law are…rendered invalid,” the complaint reads.

Given that Covid can itself disable people, Jason Cohen, a neurologist who lives in Nassau, has major concerns about how the mask ban will play out.

“I care for many patients who have brain fog from Covid and many more who are at higher risk of brain damage from Covid,” Cohen said. “Anything that discourages masking among those who want to mask is a travesty and public health disaster.”

Cohen also says that governments “should not force people to disclose their personal medical information to police in order to negotiate their way out of being accused of a crime.”

Some disabled people nevertheless have concerns about the suit itself. Ngozi, a Black disabled person who lives just over the county border in Queens, is concerned that it will end in “some type of negotiation with the state that results in keeping the law intact,” which would maintain the risk of racial profiling.

“I do not have faith in the state,” Ngozi said. “A lawsuit will not resolve the threat of mask bans anytime soon.”

Disability Rights New York is requesting a declaratory judgment that Nassau County’s mask ban violates federal law, as well as a restraining order. (read the complaint in full at the Mother Jones website linked at the very top of this post)

[im-not-corrupted]

I was consumed by the idea of Merman!Hob in the last few days and now I'm writing a Dreamling fic about it so have a small, 1.7k snippet from the much larger fic :)

Includes: near-drowning, near death experiences, perhaps many medical inaccuracies because I am not a doctor and haven't edited yet, Merman!Hob, Prince!Dream and some light angst.

---------

He awakes with a gasping, heaving breath. His lungs are greedy things, sucking in air with desperation, and he presses a hand to his chest. Beneath his palm, his heart races. Adrenaline and panic both fill his veins and his hand shakes. His lungs feel full, but as he coughs mostly involuntarily, nothing comes up at all.

It takes a bit for him to calm down. When he does, when his lungs stop heaving and he stops coughing and he is left with nothing but an ache in his lungs, his head and a rawness in his throat, he looks around himself.

He sits on a beach, the sands golden and kissed by the sun. It shines down on him, blessing his face with its light. His clothes are soaked through and no doubt ruined, and before him—before him is the ocean.

It holds none of the fierceness he saw earlier, and he stares at it blankly. It looks as welcoming, as lovely, as it did the day he stepped onto the ship. His mind had been occupied, yes, but he had enough awareness to acknowledge the sea’s beauty.

Not enough awareness to acknowledge its dangers, though. He remembers in startling clarity the coldness of its waters, the ferocity with which it drowned him, the storm that waged and threw him overboard.

He should’ve been more careful.

It is not just the ocean that lies before him, but a man, too. A man, staring at him with honey-eyes that catch the sunlight as though they were made for it, with a curiosity on his face that, if it weren’t for the sudden anxiety twisting his all-too empty stomach, would’ve endeared him immediately. His skin is tan, golden like the sands, and some distant part of his brain wants to press his lips to that skin and find out what it tastes like for himself. Like ocean salt and sweat and the sun itself, he thinks, and then considers the possibility that he may have suffered some brain damage due to oxygen deprivation.

It takes him a bit to find his voice. During that time, the man—sitting in the ocean as though he belongs there, ignorant of its gentle waves lapping at him—continues to stare, head tilted like a particularly curious bird. “Who are you?” he asks, wincing at the hoarseness of his throat. It feels scraped raw, and he thinks he would like to simply not speak for a while, only—only this is rather strange, isn’t it?

The man’s shoulders shake with laughter. He is a beautiful creature, this man, with chestnut hair framing his face. Laughter, and amusement, becomes him. Distantly, Morpheus is aware that he should probably take offence at the man’s laughter, only—only he doesn’t really have the energy. If anything, he thinks he’d much rather sleep. “The one who saved you, obviously. Or did you forget you nearly drowned?"

He has half a mind to scowl at the strange man in the water, but only just has enough energy to narrow his eyes. "You saved me," he repeats dumbly. In his defence, he did nearly drown, and sleep calls to him now. Nearly drowning is, apparently, rather exhausting. "We were in the middle of the ocean. We weren't even close to any land. How did you—"

Come to think of it, he can't recall having seen this man's face before. Though perhaps that's explained easily. He was distracted on the ship, after all, and it wasn't like he went out of the way to remember the entire crew. Both Telute and Lucienne always said he should try to interact with people a little more than he does, but he thinks recent events made him exempt from that rule these last few months.

Still. The man's statement doesn't really make sense. They were in the middle of an ocean, and in a storm no less. It would've been impossible for the man to save him then, at least not without a boat or ship of his own.

Thinking of it made his head hurt more. For a moment he feels ready to simply shrug and accept the nonsensical answer as truth in the hopes that maybe the man would leave him to rest. Logically, he knows that isn't what will happen at all. If this man knows who Morpheus is, if he recognises him, then there will be some kind of demand. A boon for saving the Prince's life.

He can't do anything about that now, though, and the idea of laying on this beach and letting himself wither under the sun's heat seems very appealing. He doesn't even know where they are, or how close he is to his kingdom. How he's supposed to make it back in this condition, he doesn't know. The task seems impossible, in all honesty.

The man does not leave him to rest, not even when Morpheus simply nods stiffly and says, "Sure. Saved me. Alright." He remains in the ocean actually, the waves lapping at his torso, and continues to stare at him blankly as though expecting something a little more. Eventually, he rolls his eyes—Rude, Morpheus thinks, but hardly cares at all in the moment—and moves a little closer. It looks almost like the ocean parts for him, but that's ridiculous.

Then—well, then things get even stranger. Which also seems impossible, but—there they are. The man shifts in the water and brings what looks like a tail out of the ocean, all golden scales and fins. Beautiful, he thinks, knowing he's staring but seemingly unable to help it. Of course the man's tail would be golden. That only makes sense when the rest of him could've been carved from sunlight.

A little belatedly, he realises just what he's staring at. Which is the man, who had a fish's tail.

Hallucinating. He is hallucinating, then. That makes sense. Still, he can't help but laugh quietly—it makes him wince, his lungs still raw and aching, but the pain is temporary and certainly doesn't matter much if he's hallucinating—and says, "You're a merman."

The statement is ludicrous. Morpheus wonders just how much damage nearly drowning can do to a person, and then figures he doesn't want to know at all, actually.

"That is what you call us, yes," the man agrees easily.

Sure. Why not. "Why did you save me then?"

He shrugs softly. “Too pretty for death,” the—the merman, of all things, tells him. It sounds almost petulant.

He is losing his mind. He had swallowed a lot of water. A merman. “One can be too pretty for death?” he asks weakly, his throat hoarse and his chest tight with pain. The ridiculous nature of the question at least makes that pain easy to ignore. It will get him later, he knows that much, but he lets himself be distracted by his amusement at the situation for a while.

The merman blinks at him, expression entirely serious. “You are.”

”Right.” Right. Of course. Too pretty for death. That makes sense. As much sense as a merman fishing him out of the water does.

Whatever energy let him carry this conversation leaves him suddenly and he falls onto his back on top of the sand, his elbows failing to hold him up any longer. The sun glares down at him and he gazes back up at it blearily. Exhaustion clings to him just as the beach does to his sea-soaked clothes. Sleep seems like a wonderful, bright idea.

He let his eyes fall shut. It isn't very effective for blocking out the sun’s rays—it remains insistent, and closing his eyes doesn't give him the satisfaction of darkness that he dearly wants. Still, while that would’ve been a problem any other time, his body yearned for the void, to let the dark take him. It would be easy to simply lay here and wither, until either the tide takes him or someone finds him. Whichever came first. He didn’t mind either way.

Then the merman spoke again. “Are you dying, pretty one?”

It took a great deal of effort, but he grunts, “No.”

”Are you sure?”

He is not, actually. But that is no concern of this mermaid, and he merely answers, “I am certain.”

Silence follows that statement. Morpheus lets himself relax, lets himself hope this is it. He can sleep now, he thought—and is quickly proven wrong, for the merman states, “You look like you’re dying. Does anybody look for you?”

He hardly cares. Distantly, though, he thinks Lucienne might be. Jessamy and Matthew, too. “Perhaps,” he says after a couple of minutes pass, when he realises he has not yet replied. "I would like to sleep now."

The merman makes a considering noise. "I do not know much about humans," he said slowly, and Morpheus can practically feel the concern in his voice now, "but I'm pretty sure that's a bad idea. I'll stay and talk to you until you're found."

"Must you?" he asks, a desperate edge to his voice. The merman's voice is pleasant enough, yes, but rest is the preferred option here, regardless of what he says.

"Yes," he confirms. Morpheus's eyes are still closed so he can't actually see but he can imagine the smile on his face easily enough.

He sighs heavily and wonders what he did to deserve this. Then figures this is some weird, twisted kind of punishment for all that happened with Orpheus and Calliope and resigns himself to his fate. "Very well."

The merman talks, almost endlessly, until the sun is low in the sky. It is, truly, an impressive amount of talking. Morpheus doesn't remember much of that afternoon. At some point, he regains just enough energy to sit up, to listen more attentively. The merman, whose name he doesn't learn, seems to appreciate that. And just when despair begins to eat at him—I will not be found, he thinks and despite his inaction while he sank into the ocean, the idea panics him, I will die on this beach—there are calls of his name from behind him. They are voices he recognises and his heart picks up its pace when he turns around to see Lucienne, Telute and Jessamy walking down the beach towards him, each of them looking a little rough but all of them alive.

When he turns back to the ocean, the merman is no longer there, and Morpheus wonders if he dreamt the whole thing up. He does not mention it as Jessamy helps him to his feet, as Telute pulls him in for a hug, as the three of them begin to make it back home, to their duties, but he does not forget the kind eyes of the man who saved him from drowning.

[grits-galraisedinthesouth]

Interesting. Very Interesting. 🤔

"Get your news from people who have a track record of telling the truth, people who do so at significant personal cost like whistleblowers."-Bill Ackman, Democrat Billionaire Hedgefund Manager

"Billionaire hedge fund manager and longtime Democratic Party donor Bill Ackman has blasted the Democrat party and fake news mainstream media outlets for lying and misleading the country about Joe Biden’s health and mental acuity. The White House, mainstream media, and even Biden’s personal physician have continually defended the Biden, insisting he is in good health and fit to serve. DEI White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre lashed out at conservative media outlets for circulating what she described as “cheap fake videos” of Joe Biden looking old, feeble, and senile. Joe Biden and Barack Obama appeared on stage together earlier this month at a fundraiser in Los Angeles, California. After the fundraiser wrapped up, Obama had to grab Joe Biden’s hand to lead him off stage. Biden was frozen. Barack Obama treated Biden like a nursing home patient and walked him off stage. Earlier this year, during a routine physical at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Biden joked about his health status. When asked about his physical examination and what his doctors had to say, he responded, “They think I look too young,” adding that “Everything’s great” regarding his health. Dr. Kevin O’Connor, responsible for evaluating the 81-year-old President, concluded that despite any perceived physical struggles, Biden is “fit for duty and fully executes all of his responsibilities without any exemptions or accommodations.” Notably, the examination did NOT include a cognitive assessment test. The White House was probably scared of the results, knowing they would doom Biden’s re-election bid for good. However, big-time lefty and longtime Democratic donor Bill Ackman, who previously said he was open to voting for Trump, has publicly blasted the Democratic party and mainstream media for misleading the country about Joe Biden’s mental acuity and health."

@BillAckman

As much as last night was an indictment of the Democratic Party for misleading party members and the country about the mental acuity and health of the president, the media deserve far more derision and scorn. I and others were repeatedly criticized by the media for questioning the competency of the president. Among other false accusations, I was accused of spreading misleading videos which clearly showed Biden’s deterioration.

Do you remember the heavily excerpted and edited @POTUS Biden @60Minutes interview where the interviewer covered for the president by saying he was ‘very tired?’ @60Minutes knew. The @nytimes knew. @CNN knew. @MSNBC knew. Left wing media have had total and complete access to the president, his staff, and his administration. They all knew, but they told you otherwise. They outright lied to you. When Robert Hur, the special counsel who deposed the president, said that the president was not fit to stand trial and therefore chose not to bring charges, the media described him as a tool of the Republican Party and character assassinated him. When the @WSJ recently published a several-thousand-word, carefully researched, front page piece on the president’s mental and physical health, it was described by left wing media as outright propaganda. Now consider who has been feeding you propaganda. A favored technique of some of the most evil leaders in history was to mislead the people by constantly repeating the Big Lie. The Big Lie is so audacious that people accept it as truth because it is repeated so often that how can it be that something so important and material could be an outright falsehood? In this case the Big Lie was our president’s fitness for office, let alone a second term. A media organization is not supposed to be a branch of the Democratic Party. The media have a profound obligation to tell the truth to the American people, particularly about something as critical for the country as the president’s mental and physical health. People very close to me, my closest family and friends, trusted the media on Biden until the @CNN commentators finally owned up to the truth about Biden last night. For months I have been accused by many friends and family of being misled by an @X -based ‘right wing echo chamber.’ The sad reality is that one of our most important institutions, the so-called ‘Fourth Estate,’ fourth only after the clergy, the nobility, and the commoners, has destroyed any remaining credibility it has. Consider how your perception of @POTUS Biden and @realDonaldTrump has been manipulated. The media can no longer save itself. A suggestion. Rely on empirical data as much as possible. Listen to what someone actually said, rather than a headline summary or article about what someone said. Get your news from people who have a track record of telling the truth, people who do so at significant personal cost like whistleblowers. I follow broad constituencies on @X on multiple issues. That has led me closer to the truth. Citizen journalism has been a much more accurate representation of reality. Thank you @elonmusk for saving this platform. It gives us a fighting chance to save our democracy.

[thebiscuiteternal]

116 kids left vulnerable to measles, polio after nurse falsified vaccine records - ABC News

In its investigation, the NYSDOH says they learned that Miceli would purchase a small supply of vaccines and pretend to administer doses to children. For one vaccine, she reported that she had administered 30 times the number of doses than she had purchased, according to the NYSDOH.

Miceli allegedly was a longtime opponent of vaccines and vaccine mandates, which she made clear on social media, according to the NYSDOH. On Surviving Naturally's Facebook page, officials say, she posted material claiming vaccines have "unidentified contaminants" that lead to autism, pregnancy miscarriage, cancer, and death.

"In posting anti-vaccination propaganda on social media, Miceli spread dangerous public-health falsehoods and sowed fear about vaccines at the same time that she claimed, as a licensed nurse, to be protecting public health by administering immunizations required for enrollment in schools and day cares," the NYSDOH said in a press release.

Miceli also allegedly expressed her opposition to a New York state bill that eliminated non-medical exemptions from the state's school and day care vaccine requirements. The bill was passed by the state legislature and became law in June 2019.

[warpfive]

can I request malcolm reed with a medical officer S/O? ☄️

malcolm reed x doctor!reader

CW: gn!reader

malcolm doesn’t like going to sick bay. it’s nothing against you or phlox - their resident denobulan is strange but friendly and you…well, you’re you. malcolm would be hard-pressed to find an excuse not to see you if it weren’t for your occupation. he just doesn’t being poked and prodded and examined unless his life depends on it - and even then, he wants it to be over quickly.

in the beginning, malcolm had this fantasy that because he was dating you, he’d be somehow exempt from showing up for regular crew physicals. or at the very least, maybe he can get his physical from you…in private…in his quarters…

that’s not how it goes. malcolm is ordered into sickbay and you welcome him with a soft smile but direct him on the bed. he tries to give you a look, hoping you could maybe let him off the hook with a quick physical just so he could say he technically did it. but the only favor malcolm is given is a sweet laugh, and brush of his hand, and a scanner in his face.

before, in a crunch, malcolm would be able to work through an injury. if he focuses hard enough, he can usually ignore the pain until his work is done. that doesn’t really happen when he starts dating you. unless sick bay is swamped, you always seem to find malcolm right when he gets a scrape, or in the most serious instance, when he banged his head and was seeing double. (he didn’t seem too upset that there were two of you.)

on the other end of the spectrum, when malcolm gets sick, he only wants you to take care of him. again, nothing against phlox, but he prefers the way you press your cool hand against his burning forehead to phlox’s pet leech. he becomes a big baby when he’s sick, and while he puts up a front for the crew, he absolutely falls into bed and wants you to nurse him.

when he’s in a teasing mood, expect him to call you “doctor” in a flirty tone. of course, this is malcolm, so you really have to know him and get him to pick up on his flirting. he would teasingly call you “doctor” in front of other people and they would simply assume he was calling you by your title - but no, you picked up on the special way he says the syllables. 

but when you two are alone, malcolm is absolutely embarrassing. calling you things like “doctor delightful” and insists he needs a full body check-up. you tell him to talk to phlox about it and he argues that it needs to be done as soon as possible. besides, he trusts you more than most people - though, once you tell him he really should go to sick bay for this problem or that, he quickly changes the subject. 

malcolm is a great listener, so there’s been many occasions where he ends up sitting and listening as you ramble on about some problem you’re having in sick bay. he doesn’t really understand the medical talk (he was never very good at biology) but he does try his best to help. though, more often than not, malcolm helps you by just letting you ramble.

you’re a doctor. you’re not supposed to be biased for or against any one of your patients. so when the enterprise is attacked/disabled/etc and a lot of the crew start flooding in, malcolm is the one who sets you straight and reminds you that you can’t just treat him first and ignore those who need it most. he’s very good at being objective, though knowing you want to help him first will always affirm that you love him.

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

The Biden administration’s Department of Health and Human Services is recommending that the Drug Enforcement Administration significantly loosen federal restrictions on marijuana but stopped short of advising that it should be entirely removed from the Controlled Substances Act.

The health agency wants the drug moved from Schedule I to Schedule III under the CSA, potentially the biggest change in federal drug policy in decades.

HHS Assistant Secretary of Health Rachel Levine wrote in a Tuesday letter to the DEA, first reported by Bloomberg News, that the recommendation was based on a review conducted by the Food and Drug Administration.

The DEA confirmed to POLITICO that it received the letter.

“As part of this process, HHS conducted a scientific and medical evaluation for consideration by DEA. DEA has the final authority to schedule or reschedule a drug under the Controlled Substances Act,” a spokesperson for the agency said in a statement. “DEA will now initiate its review.”

The HHS letter is part of the official review process initiated by President Joe Biden last October: The FDA conducts the review, which is then sent to the National Institute on Drug Abuse and HHS, after which HHS transmits a letter of recommendation to the DEA. The DEA is not required to follow HHS’s recommendation.

The White House on Wednesday refused to comment on the review process.

“The administration process is an independent process led by HHS, led by the Department of Justice, and guided by evidence,” White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters. “We’re just not going to comment on that.”

Cannabis is currently a Schedule I substance on the CSA, which means it is deemed to have a high likelihood of abuse and no medical uses. Heroin and LSD are also Schedule I drugs. Schedule III drugs are categorized as having “moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence.” The category includes ketamine and testosterone.

The HHS recommendation is the result of a nearly yearlong federal review of all available marijuana research. Biden’s executive action — which also included federal pardons for low-level marijuana convictions — was seen by many as a political move taken ahead of the midterm elections to incentivize turnout among younger and more progressive voters.

At the time, advocates and some lawmakers urged Biden to take clear steps to remove cannabis completely from the CSA — versus rescheduling it. Legalization advocates on Wednesday reiterated that rescheduling would not solve many of the problem they’ve been asking the Biden administration to correct.

“Rescheduling cannabis from 1 to 3 does not end criminalization, it just rebrands it. People will still be subject to criminal penalties for mere possession, regardless of their legal status in a state-level medical program,” cannabis advocate Justin Strekal told POLITICO on Wednesday.

FEDERAL-STATE CONFLICT

Federal law has failed to keep up with massive changes over the last decade in state cannabis policies. 23 states now allow anyone at least 21 years old to legally posses the drug, while 38 states have established medical marijuana programs.

But because cannabis businesses are not federally legal, they are subject to a federal tax code that prohibits narcotics traffickers from taking typical tax exemptions for business expenses like salaries and benefits. That code does not apply to Schedule III, so if the DEA approved HHS’ recommendation, cannabis businesses around the country would immediately be paying much less in federal taxes.

That would provide a big boost to the financially struggling industry.

“It’s giant,” said Charlie Bachtell, CEO of Cresco Labs, one of the country’s largest cannabis companies, in an interview. “I think you would see a healthier cannabis industry a year from now.”

Rescheduling could also mean legislative changes on Capitol Hill, where a bill to make it easier for banks to offer financial services to the cannabis industry — backed by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sens. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) — has been slowly plodding toward the finish line.

Changing marijuana’s federal classification would almost certainly make it easier for cannabis businesses to access banking services and raise cash even without any legislative changes.

“I don’t see a need for the SAFE Banking Act if this in fact becomes the official position,” said Jonathan Havens, a cannabis attorney at Saul Ewing who previously worked for the FDA. “I’m not saying that all banks will want to jump into this space, but the need for safe harbors I don’t think exists like it does today.”

Schumer on Wednesday urged the DEA to “quickly follow through on this important step” but added he is “continuing to work in Congress to pass important marijuana legislation and criminal justice reform.”

The shift in federal cannabis policy would also make it easier to conduct research on the health effects of cannabis consumption and for pharmaceutical companies to bring cannabis-based drugs to market. Researchers have long chafed at restrictions that only allow them to procure cannabis from a single farm at the University of Mississippi that bears little resemblance to the high-potency products many consumers are purchasing in state-legal markets.

But if the FDA decides to fully enforce regulations on the cannabis industry as it does all other Schedule III drugs, that could mean major changes for state markets.

“The question that I have is whether or not the current industry will eventually be replaced by the pharmaceutical industry,” said Rachel Gillette, head of the cannabis practice at Holland & Hart, noting that ketamine and anabolic steroids are also Schedule III drugs. “I can’t go down to the corner store and buy those things.”

Some state regulators, however, don’t think that much will change.

“This adjusts the type of security and type of bureaucracy that exists around federal research into the substance [and] it would make it easier for companies to bring cannabis based pharmaceuticals into market,” said John Hudak, Director of Maine’s Office of Cannabis Policy, in an interview. “But in terms of administration of a state program, it has very little impact.”

MIXED RESPONSE

The cannabis industry on Wednesday was ebullient, while drug legalization advocates and some lawmakers had a more tepid — or downright condemnatory — response to the news.

“We believe that rescheduling to Schedule III will mark the most significant federal cannabis reform in modern history,” said Edward Conklin, executive director of the US Cannabis Council, an advocacy and trade group, in a statement. “President Biden is effectively declaring an end to Nixon’s failed war on cannabis and placing the nation on a trajectory to end prohibition.”

While the industry would see immediate financial benefits from a loosening of federal restrictions, however, criminal penalties on cannabis would not change dramatically. That prompted some advocates to criticize the HHS recommendation.

“This shift would fall woefully short of the promises made by President Biden during his 2020 presidential election campaign, especially promises made to Black and Brown communities,” said Cat Packer, director of drug markets and regulation at the Drug Policy Alliance, which advocates legalizing all drugs.

Anti-legalization advocates, meanwhile, blasted the move as potentially detrimental to public health.

“The addiction profiteers who have been exposed for lying about marijuana’s physical, mental and economic impacts, are desperately looking for legitimacy in the wake of mounting evidence their products are harming millions of Americans,” said Kevin Sabet, president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, in a statement. “It is regrettable that the Department of Health and Human Services move now appears to be a nod to those monied interests.”

[justinspoliticalcorner]

David Smith at The Guardian:

Robert Kennedy Jr, a longshot independent candidate for US president, has sought to woo Libertarian party voters by casting rivals Donald Trump and Joe Biden as enemies of individual freedom. Kennedy, 70, brought Libertarians to their feet by promising to pardon government whistleblower Edward Snowden, currently exiled in Russia, and drop espionage charges against Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder battling US attempts to extradite him from Britain. Founded in 1971, the Libertarian party is committed to limiting the size and scope of government, and gained 1.2% of the national vote in the 2020 presidential election. But with this year’s race looking tight, Kennedy, an anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist and environmental advocate, and Trump, the Republican nominee, are chasing votes at its convention in Washington.

Early in a 45-minute speech, Kennedy made light of the recent revelation that he had a brainworm more than a decade ago. Accusing past leaders of repeatedly encroaching on personal liberties, up to and including the coronavirus pandemic, he said to applause: “Maybe a brainworm ate that part of memory, but I don’t recall any part of the United States constitution where there is an exemption for pandemics.” Addressing a few hundred delegates, Kennedy accused Trump of allowing the government to abuse individual liberty during the pandemic. He said: “I think he had the right instinct when he came into office. He was initially very reluctant to impose lockdowns, but then he got rolled by his bureaucrats. He caved in and many of our most fundamental rights disappeared practically overnight.”

Kennedy earned further applause when he asserted: “All of our constitutional rights were ploughed under. They closed all the churches but they kept open the Walmarts and the liquor stores.” He accused Trump of closing down 3.3m businesses. “President Trump said he was going to run America like a business, and he came in and he gave the keys to all of our businesses to a 50-year bureaucrat who’d never been elected to anything and had no accountability,” he said. Kennedy touched a nerve in his audience when he turned to the espionage charges against Assange, who this week won the right to bring a fresh appeal against his extradition, and National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower Snowden. Each line was greeted with cheers and applause as he spoke.

“President Trump also assaulted the first amendment and failed to defend press freedom when he continued President [Barack] Obama’s persecution and prosecution of Julian Assange,” he said. “Assange should be celebrated as a hero. He did exactly what journalists are supposed to do, which is to expose government corruption. We shouldn’t put him in prison; we should have a monument to him here in Washington DC. “The same is true of Edward Snowden … He’s a hero, not a criminal, and I’m going to tell you what I’m going to do. I’m going to do what President Trump should have done. On my first day in office, I’m going to pardon Edward Snowden and I’m going to drop charges – all charges – against Julian Assange.” The room erupted in roars of approval.

[...] He took aim at the current president, too, saying: “When President Trump left office, the assault on the constitution intensified. President Biden violated a freedom so fundamental that James Madison didn’t even think to put it in the Bill of Rights.” Kennedy accused Biden of “a programme of coercion and information control” during the pandemic, repeating unfounded claims that Biden colluded with the FBI to coerce social media sites to allow government agencies to carry out “an obscene orgy of federal censorship”. He said it went from “medical misinformation” to “an entire censorship industrial complex” that also suppresses critics of the war in Ukraine.

Speaking at the Libertarian National Convention Friday, Independent Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. hit at both Donald Trump and Joe Biden for their un-libertarian-like ways but moreso the former.

[gemkun]

@ephemyrals said : ❛ so, what do i owe this pleasure? ❜ (aven to ratio) ↬ &. 𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐝𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐮𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐭𝐬.

      ⸻       ❝   stop   talking.   ❞   deft   hands   make   light   work   ,   methodically   suturing   the   gash   before   it   proceeds   to   weep   again.   fortunately   ,   under   his   specialised   management   ,   it   will   hardly   scar.   ❝   you’ll   exacerbate   the   wound.   ❞   his   eyes   remain   trained   on   his   task   at   hand   ,   though   his   voice   glares   at   the   avgin   all   the   same.   without   a   word   of   warning   ,   this   liability   may   very   well   bleed   out   in   the   next   system   hour.    

  irate   ,   his   gripe   is   verbalised   ,   but   a   poised   calm   spares   the   soldier   of   genuine   fury   from   the   doctor.   ❝   how   is   it   that   after   every   deployment   you   wind   up   in   my   clinic   time   and   time   again   ?   ❞   rhetorical   ,   perhaps   ,   is   his   question.   he   sets   the   needle   aside   ,   dismissing   his   previous   enquiry   to   instead   inspect   the   surgical   site.   before   moving   to   pluck   cotton   with   forceps   ,   doused   in   a   common   antiseptic.   ❝   do   you   make   it   your   goal   to   become   deliberately   injured   on   the   battlefield   ?   ❞   there   is   a   sting   ,   no   doubt   ,   brought   by   the   introduction   of   alcohol.   but   it   is   a   speck   compared   to   the   provocation.   and   veritas   wears   his   realisation   —   averting   gaze   momentarily   ,   as   he   casts   his   gaze   to   the   tray   littered   in   instruments   by   his   side.

  ❝   .   .   .   ❞

  retrieving   gauze   ,   concentration   applies   the   finishing   touches   and   the   medic   leans   away   ,   to   survey   his   attended   client.   ❝   there.   ❞   he   murmurs   ,   in   what   could   be   argued   as   satisfied   ,   whether   with   his   work   or   the   state   of   the   patient   ,   remains   yet   to   be   seen.   with   a   firm   press   ,   he   clips   the   ends   of   fabric.   ❝   you   should   know   the   drill   by   now   —   avoid   additional   stresses   on   the   area   or   at   the   very   least   ,   attempt   to   refrain   from   the   next   mission.   if   you   require   it   ,   i   can   fill   out   a   form   that   will   grant   you   exemption.   ❞   the   form   he   speaks   of   ,   is   gestured   to   upon   his   immaculate   bench.   organised   in   a   fashion   many   would   envy.

  ❝   i   will   also   be   supplying   you   with   analgesics   should   the   pain   worsen.   it   will   last   no   more   than   three   days.   ❞   off   a   clipboard   it   flies   ,   and   the   sigonian   finds   purchase   in   a   slip   as   promised.   gifting   him   with   a   prescription   ,   written   in   impeccable   print.   ❝   should   you   need   a   refill   —   ❞   flitting   ,   his   focus   dawns   on   the   male.   drawing   the   sunrise   and   the   sunset   to   clash.   eclipsing   in   mutual   comprehension.

  ❝   —   you   know   where   to   find   me.   ❞

[tflegendarium]

Taking advantage of the gap that has been opened: legendary! Skyfire in tfp universe

Even if it's just everyone reacting to him being starscream's husband

Gosh, everyone would be so shocked and very, very quickly learn to not shit talk Skyfire's wife (including the TFP version) in front of him because he will not tolerate it.

The Autobots would be absolutely confused by Skyfire's taste and assume, privately, the Starscreams must be incredibly different. Optimus would be reminiscing about his own Decepticon first love and sympathize.

The kids would probably be the ones Skyfire spoke to the most about Starscream and he'd find them delightful. He's very used to humans and Earth having, like G1 Skyfire, woken up there and become deeply involved with humanity and helping them rebuild post-Unicron.

He'd probably be more than a little fascinated from a purely academic standpoint of the difference in cyberbiology between them and the cultural development. I think he'd have pretty long, friendly discussions with both Ratchet and Optimus once he gets used to them.

His reactions to the Decepticons would also be fun.

He would be instantly vehemently uncomfortable with the treatment of the Vehicons on both sides as easily replaceable and largely unfeeling.

KOBD he'd actually probably put off a little initially because of his automatic friendliness. These two very closely resemble their alternate universe counterparts. And absolutely no one Autobot associated would touch a medic (or medic assistant) and especially not Mirage's only child. If he didn't get you first, Hound would. Defending yourself being the obvious exception because they aren't completely naive, but there's a large "don't touch" sign hanging over Knock Out.

Skyfire has spoken to both L!Versions of them and largely liked them.

KOBD would both definitely be interested in the gossip of the SkyStar marriage.

Soundwave is very different in many ways from his counterpart, but Skyfire would be largely neutral, given their lack of interaction.

Shockwave would largely have no opinion, much like Predaking.

Dreadwing, he knew personally and there would be a distinct awkwardness to Skyfire interacting with the counterpart of his ex.

Airachnid would be briefly mistaken for Blackarachnia, which would lead to some interesting conversation. They would hate each other, though, and she'd be interested in potential leverage but likely not overtly interested in his presence.

Starscream would be the most dramatic because Skyfire can see the differences but also similarities, and that's his beloved wife, who is Alone. He would be hard pressed to leave Starscream alone, and there would be no hostility from his part. Starscream would probably be very thrown by his spouse and thinking back to his own Jetfire and their falling out. It would be a very intense tension and Skyfire wanting to scoop TFP Starscream up especially when he first hears a "joke" about his relationship with Megatron.

It would be immediate violence if he had to interact with TFP Megatron. Skyfire grew up in a military family and was initially down to serve before his exemption and it would be showing. Legend Magetron and Starscream are genuine friends who mutually respect each other. L!Skyfire would absolutely hate TFP!Megatron for his treatment of all Decepticons and behavior. It would not end pretty because Skyfire is a big military grade shuttle and is of size with Predaking easily. He dwarfs him. Megatron would probably be pretty scathing to Starscream and Skyfire and then have to deal with him.

[berniecranes]

xxxi. thing you carry everywhere

It almost felt surreal taking your final step off that plane. You gripped the duffel bag in your hand that carries your belongings. Your fatigues and the few personal items you got during your time there. You were standing in your Class As for the last time ever. The hat tossed in your bag, you never were a fan of wearing it. The pins glistened in the sunlight, your medical badge clearly lay on both sides of your lapels.

You are home. At least physically you are. Your body is home, but everything else will take time. You will need to learn how to carry on. Understand how to do your daily tasks that you remember being so easy. You try to make yourself right at home. But you know that is easier said than done. You've heard the stories soliders share laying in the recovery room talking eagerly about home, sometimes there is only excitement. Sometimes you can catch that lingering fear of what if home can no longer feel like home again? What if you've done too much damage, hurt too many things? You can never forgive yourself, so you stay at arms length away from the only thing keeping that light within you lit.

You scan the crowd of people, watching others reunite with their loved ones. Seeing the tears, hearing the screams and exclamations. Watching them pull each other into their arms with utter desperation. They need to physically feel their loved ones are home.

You cannot wait for that moment. You continue to walk until your hear your named called out.

Keith! Keith-José!

It has been a long time since you've been called that. It's a rejuvenating yet distant feeling. You turn your head a touch frantic, trying to find Theodore. There he is. He looks good just like he did before. But he looks different. He's doing his hair differently now. It doesn't look bad, it's nice but it's just different. You wonder what he noticed about you. You both hurry to each other, you set your bag on the ground and he pulls you into his arms. There was no worry in the world, the only thing mattered was being back in Teddy's arms. You never want to leave. Here in this moment you feel safe and secure. You feel exempt from all outside thoughts that haunt your brain. This feels good, better than anything to imagine and yet a feeling of guilt fills you.

This was not going to be easy. You knew this. You know this is your reality. You don't want to pull away, but he released you, bringing your head into his hands. You both are roughly the same height, build not being too different. Teddy was your other half, you have waited to return to him. You cannot wait until you're in between the walls of your apartment, and you can press a kiss on his lips. And try to begin the impossible task of picking up where you left off, only now with memories that will never leave you.

[queen-street-news]

New Post has been published on https://bloornews.com/blog-toronto/misunderstanding-caused-bc-company-to-say-health-canada-licensed-it-to-sell-cocaine-trudeau-says/

‘Misunderstanding’ Caused BC Company to Say Health Canada Licensed It to Sell Cocaine, Trudeau Says

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says it was a “misunderstanding” that caused a British Columbia-based company to say Health Canada granted it permission to produce, sell, and distribute cocaine.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks to the media in Ottawa on Feb. 12, 2023. (Patrick Doyle/The Canadian Press)

Trudeau told reporters in Winnipeg on March 3 that he was “as surprised” as B.C. Premier David Eby when he heard that the company Adastra Holdings Ltd., which produces marijuana for adult use and medical sales out of its headquarters in Langley, B.C., announced on Feb. 22 that it was permitted by Health Canada to “legally possess, produce, sell and distribute” cocaine.

The company said in a news release that it had been granted a Health Canada amendment to its controlled substance dealer’s licence on Feb. 17.

Eby first responded to the company’s statement on March 2, saying he was “astonished” that Health Canada would grant the amendment and that his government would be contacting Health Canada for answers.

“I was as surprised as the premier of British Columbia was to see that company was talking about selling cocaine on the open market or commercializing it,” Trudeau said on March 3.

“There are limited and very restricted permissions for certain pharmaceutical companies to use that substance for research purposes and for very specific narrowly prescribed medical purposes, but it is not a permission to sell it commercially or provide it on an open market.”

The prime minister said his government is actively addressing the issue.

“We are working very quickly with this company to correct their misunderstanding that their press release has caused,” he said, adding that decriminalizing the commercial sale of cocaine “is not something that this government is looking at furthering.”

Decriminalization B.C. decriminalized possession of up to 2.5 grams of certain hard drugs, including cocaine, beginning on Jan. 31 following Health Canada’s approval of three-year experimental decriminalization exemption program back in May 2022.

Federal Mental Health and Addictions Minister Carolyn Bennett has said that B.C.’s decriminalization plan will reduce “the stigma, the fear, and shame that keep people who use drugs silent about their use, or using alone.”

In 2022, B.C. had an average of over six people dying from drug overdoses every day, and over 11,000 people in the province have died from illicit drug overdoses since the provincial government declared a public health emergency in 2016.

Federal Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre has criticized the decriminalization policy, saying the solution to the issue of addiction is “more treatment and recovery,” rather than “more poison.”

Both Trudeau and Justice Minister David Lametti have said Ottawa has no plans for a national drug decriminalization policy.

The Canadian Press and Marnie Cathcart contributed to this report.

(Patrick Doyle/The Canadian Press) Peter Wilson