濮阳东方医院男科治早泄口碑好很不错(濮阳东方看男科靠谱吗) (今日更新中)

In a pair of 2015 speeches, President Donald Trump's nominee for a federal judgeship in Texas described transgender children as evidence of "Satan's plan," lamented that states were banning conversion therapy and argued that sanctioning same-sex marriage would lead to polygamy and bestiality.Jeff Mateer, the current first assistant attorney general of Texas, was serving at the time as general counsel of the First Liberty Institute, a religious liberty advocacy group known before 2016 as the Liberty Institute. He faced criticism from LGBT rights groups for his work with the organization, such as opposing the expansion of nondiscrimination protections to LGBT people in the city of Plano. If confirmed by the US Senate, he will serve on the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.In a May 2015 speech, titled "The Church and Homosexuality," Mateer discussed a Colorado lawsuit in which the parents of a transgender girl sued her school for preventing her from using the bathroom of her choice."In Colorado, a public school has been sued because a first grader and I forget the sex, she's a girl who thinks she's a boy or a boy who thinks she's a girl, it's probably that, a boy who thinks she's a girl," Mateer said in a video posted on Vimeo in 2015 and reviewed by CNN's KFile. "And the school said, 'Well, she's not using the girl's restroom.' And so she has now sued to have a right to go in. Now, I submit to you, a parent of three children who are now young adults, a first grader really knows what their sexual identity? I mean it just really shows you how Satan's plan is working and the destruction that's going on."Mateer's nomination comes as the Trump administration has unveiled a series of actions aimed at rolling back advancements for gay and transgender rights. Trump vowed to fight for the LGBT community during his presidential campaign and said last April that people should "use the bathroom they feel is appropriate." Since taking office, however, Trump has withdrawn an Obama administration directive that allowed transgender students in public schools to use the bathroom of their choice and issued a directive banning transgender military recruits.In that same May 2015 speech, Mateer said that the Supreme Court decision allowing same-sex marriage could lead to what he called "disgusting" new forms of matrimony."I submit to you that there'll be no line there," he said. "And actually in the arguments Chief Justice Roberts, who's in the center there said, I mean, what is the limiting? Why couldn't four 4 people wanna get married? Why not one man and three women? Or three women and one man? And we're gonna spare you some of those slides. We actually have a presentation that we get into it. And I'll tell you, we say it's PG-13, it may be R, or what do they call the next one? NC-17 or whatever?"He continued, "I mean, it's disgusting. I've learned words I didn't know. I mean, other than...my assistants here, have you ever heard the word 'throuple'?'Throuple' so that's three people coming together of different sexes, maybe mixed sexes. Them coming together. There are people who marry themselves. Somebody wanted to marry a tree. People marrying their pets. It's just like -- you know, you read the New Testament and you read about all the things and you think, 'Oh, that's not going on in our community.' Oh yes it is. We're back to that time where debauchery rules."Later that year in November 2015, Mateer lamented that states were banning gay conversion therapy at a conference hosted by controversial pastor Kevin Swanson, who preaches that the Biblical punishment for homosexuality is death."Biblical counselors and therapists, we've seen cases in New Jersey and in California where folks have gotten in trouble because they gave biblical counseling and, you know, the issue is always, it's same sex," Mateer says in audio obtained by CNN's KFile. "And if you're giving conversion therapy, that's been outlawed in at least two states and then in some local areas. So they're invading that area."Groups like the American Psychiatric Association and the American Pediatric Association have condemned the practice as having no scientific basis and the potential to do mental harm.Mateer did not respond to a request for comment. A Department of Justice spokesperson declined to comment on Mateer's remarks. 4371

Hundreds of thousands of dollars in coronavirus relief payments have been sent to people behind bars across the United States, and the IRS wants the money back. The federal tax agency is asking state officials to help claw back the cash it says was mistakenly sent. The legislation that authorized the payments during the pandemic doesn’t specifically exclude jail or prison inmates. An IRS spokesman says the agency is relying on the unrelated Social Security Act, which bans incarcerated people from receiving some types of benefit payments. Some groups say inmates need the money, especially if they've been recently released. 637

If you like sweets in the morning, then Cinnabon has good news for you.On Thursday, the baked goods store announced that its new line of frozen breakfast creations was available in the freezer aisle at Walmart. 218

In a sharp turn of events, a San Francisco judge denied Monsanto's request to nix a 0 million award to a man who said he got terminal cancer from Roundup weedkiller.But she's also slashing that man's punitive award down to about million.Former school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson was the first cancer patient to take Monsanto to trial, claiming Roundup gave him non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.Jurors sided with Johnson and awarded him 0 million in punitive damages (to punish Monsanto) and about million in compensatory damages (for Johnson's lost income, pain and suffering).The jury's verdict came in August. But on October 10, the tide appeared to turn in Monsanto's favor.That's when Superior Court Judge Suzanne Bolanos issued a tentative ruling granting Monsanto's request for a JNOV -- a judgment notwithstanding verdict. That's basically when a judge in a civil case overrules the jury's decision.Bolanos said the plaintiff "presented no clear and convincing evidence of malice or oppression to support an award of punitive damages." In other words, Johnson's entire 0 million punitive award was in jeopardy.The judge gave attorneys on both sides a few days to respond and further make their cases.When she issued her final ruling Monday, Bolanos reversed her tentative ruling and denied Monsanto's request for a JNOV.But it wasn't a complete victory for Johnson. Instead of 9 million in combined damage awards, Johnson is slated to get a total of about million.Bolanos said the punitive award was too high and needed to match Johnson's million compensatory award."In enforcing due process limits, the court does not sit as a replacement for the jury but only as a check on arbitrary awards," Bolanos wrote in her ruling Monday."The punitive damages award must be constitutionally reduced to the maximum allowed by due process in this case -- ,253,209.35 -- equal to the amount of compensatory damages awarded by the jury based on its findings of harm to the plaintiff."Monsanto had also requested a new trial on the punitive damages. The judge said that request will be denied if Johnson accepts the smaller punitive award. If he does not accept the million punitive award, then a new trial would be set.The 1 million plummet in Johnson's punitive award caught some legal experts by surprise, including University of Richmond?law professor Carl Tobias."I am somewhat surprised, but the punitive damage award was high even though the (percentage of) reduction was steep," Tobias said. "No one thought the plaintiff would retain the whole (punitive damages) award." 2626

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said at Wednesday's CNN town hall that she doesn't think campaigning on a potential impeachment of President Donald Trump is a good issue to run on."I do not think that impeachment is a policy agenda," she said.The California Democrat pointed to the ongoing special counsel investigation led by former FBI Director Robert Mueller, saying everyone should "let it take its course" before judging the outcome, and noting the difficult, divisive nature of moving to oust a president."Impeachment is, to me, divisive," Pelosi said. "Again, if the facts are there, if the facts are there, then this would have to be bipartisan to go forward. But if it is viewed as partisan, it will divide the country, and I just don't think that's what we should do." 789

来源：资阳报