Chef

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

The original lyric was:

“Some of those that hold office are the same that burn crosses.”

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

Under His eye.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago

Not a movie but Netflix miniseries - MAID

Non-spoiler summary: Single mother fleeing abusive relationship with nothing but $18 in her pocket.

That show gave me anxiety every episode and it was fantastic.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

In the US, doctors are obligated to treat patients in immediate need of care (in a professional setting - an emergency department, for example - not just walking down a street.) They can’t discriminate against patients for non-clinically relevant reasons (race, gender identity, etc.) They CAN refuse care if they lack specific skills or the patient is “abusive.”

HOWEVER, these are ethical obligations (I pulled that info from the American Medical Association’s Code of Medical Ethics.)

You asked about legal obligations.

I am not well versed in doctors’ legal duty of care - laws are not consistent across national and local jurisdictions.

You also used the word “aid” so I am approaching it from an emergency context.

In a professional setting, there are limited reasons a medical professional could refuse emergency care where the immediate outcome is death. Perhaps someone with more legal expertise could direct you - I’m only familiar with ethical constraints.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago

Sleep debt is real and the interest rate is very high.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago

His name is Jay Jacobs. He is a cancer and needs to be removed.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The loss of loss.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

“She doesn’t even have the concept of a plan!”

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago

13 federal circuits.

There should be 13 Supreme Court justices.

Each justice could be responsible as “executive” of their circuit.

12 associate justices for the 1st through 12th circuit.

The chief justice is assigned the Federal Appeals Circuit.

It makes way too much sense.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

You can’t change the number of justices on the Supreme Court.

Except that you can.

And they did. Eight times.

1789 - six justices

1801 - reduced to five justices

1802 - restored to six justices

1807 - seven justices

1836 - nine justices

1863 - ten justices

1866 - nine justices

1867 - eight justices

1869 - nine justices

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

Yo yo yo, let him cook.

 
view more: next ›