治疗痔疮的中山小医院(中山大便脓血的情况) (今日更新中)

In the summer of 2013, Aimee Stephens sent her employer a letter explaining she was about to change her life. She was a transgender woman, and she intended to start dressing as such at work.She never expected then that she was about to enter into a yearslong legal dispute, one that might soon become a litmus test for lesbian, gay and transgender rights before the next US Supreme Court.Stephens had spent months drafting the message to management at R&G and G&R Harris Funeral Homes, a family-owned business in the Detroit area, she says. She was 52 years old at the time, and she had spent her entire life fighting the knowledge she was a transgender woman, to the point that she had considered ending her life.Now that she was coming out at work, she hoped her nearly six years of positive performance reviews, which had earned her regular raises, would count in her favor.But her boss, a devout Christian, told her the situation was "not going to work out," according to court documents. Thomas Rost offered her a severance package when she was fired, but she declined to accept it.She filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Department of Labor's enforcement agency, and the government sued the funeral home. The department accused the funeral home of firing Stephens for being transgender and for her refusal to conform to sex-based stereotypes.A district court agreed with the funeral home that the federal workplace discrimination law known as Title VII did not protect transgender people. But it found that the funeral home did discriminate against Stephens for her refusal to conform to its "preferences, expectations, or stereotypes" for women. The EEOC appealed.The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Stephens and the EEOC in March. The funeral home's lawyers accused the court of exceeding its authority by expanding the definition of sex in a way that threatens to "shift" what it means to be a man or a woman.In July, lawyers representing the funeral home asked the Supreme Court to take up the case to determine if transgender individuals are protected under Title VII's sex-based provisions. If the court takes up the case, it could have broader implications for the definition of sex-based discrimination. And it could impact case law that precludes firing anyone -- gay, straight or cisgender -- for not adhering to sex-based stereotypes."The stakes don't get much higher than being able to keep your job," said Harper Jean Tobin, director of policy for the National Center for Transgender Equality. "Harris Funeral Homes is a stark example of the job discrimination that so many transgender people face."Advocates say it's one of the most important current civil rights issues for the transgender community, along with similar considerations in education and health care. And they say it has been settled by years of case law. In the past two decades, numerous federal courts have ruled that federal sex discrimination laws apply to transgender and gender-nonconforming people, including Title VII, the Title IX education law, and Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act.But lawyers from the Alliance Defending Freedom, the conservative Christian nonprofit representing the funeral home, say it's far from settled."No court or federal agency has the authority to rewrite a federal statute. That power belongs solely to Congress. Replacing 'sex' with 'gender identity,' as the 6th Circuit and the EEOC have done, is a dramatic change," senior counsel Jim Campbell said in a statement."What it means to be male or female shifts from a biological reality based in anatomy and physiology to a subjective perception. Far-reaching consequences accompany such a transformation." 3767

In the months since last November's election, the Merriam-Webster dictionary has been on overdrive.It's transformed itself into a cheeky, fact-checking machine. And in the process, it's struck social gold (more than half a million Twitter followers and counting).On Monday, the dictionary released more than 250 new words and definitions. True to its fresh image, the list includes several words that, in this new political and social climate, have taken on a different meaning.Consider "troll."Originally, it was a noun used to describe a dwarf or giant in Scandinavian folklore. The new definition that Merriam-Webster added is a verb: "to antagonize (others) online by deliberately posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content."How about "dog whistle?"Once upon a time, it was what it said: a whistle for dogs inaudible to humans. Now, it's earned a political twist: It's "an expression or statement that has a secondary meaning intended to be understood only by a particular group of people."Other additions this go-round include "alt-right," "concealed carry" and "open carry.""With politics seeming to be ever-prominent in the public's mind, terms like alt-right and dog whistle are not surprising additions," Merriam-Webster said in a statement on its website.The dictionary usually releases its list of new words every few months. When the last list came out in February, the 1,000+ new words included "SCOTUS," "FLOTUS," and "truther." 1491

It’s taco time. Mookie Betts with the Los Angeles Dodgers helped his team beat the Tampa Bay Rays, and he also helped fans get a free taco.“TACOS ON ME!!!!” the right fielder tweeted out Wednesday morning. 213

INDIANAPOLIS -- An Indianapolis family is pleading for help to find the man they say broke into their home and ended up in bed with two little girls. Veronica Mildenberg says her 6-year-old and 10-year-old daughters were sleeping in the top bunk of her bed when the stranger climbed up with them.The 10-year-old woke up and screamed. “He must have climbed up the stairwell and got in bed with her. That’s when she hollered for her grandma,” Mildenberg said. “He woke her up because he touched her leg.”The surveillance video below shows the suspect peeking into the windows of the home on New York Street around 1:45 a.m. Minutes later, family members say he went to the back of the home and climbed through a kitchen window with a broken lock.   779

It was supposed to be a make-or-break moment.When the Trump administration said last September it was pulling the plug on Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, March 5 was the program's official end date.But it was so much more than a date on the calendar. It was the looming deadline that finally was going to force Congress to tackle the perennial political hot potato of immigration.Protesters organized around it. Lawmakers invoked it in fiery speeches. The President warned that time was running out to make a deal.Now, here we are, just days from that fateful date and no solution in sight. And what about Monday's deadline? Well, it still exists on paper. But it's become more of a symbolic marker than a moment when anything major is expected to happen for the roughly 700,000 DACA recipients.Here's a look at how we got here, and what happens next: How did this happen? 893

来源：资阳报