濮阳东方妇科医院评价比较高-【濮阳东方医院】,濮阳东方医院,濮阳东方口碑很好,濮阳东方医院男科好不好啊,濮阳东方男科医院割包皮手术安全放心,濮阳东方医院看早泄非常靠谱,濮阳东方医院男科收费不贵,濮阳东方医院男科咨询专家在线

SALT LAKE CITY — Some pornographic websites are beginning to comply with a new Utah law requiring that warning labels be attached to adult-oriented materials.At least three major porn sites — Pornhub, XTube and RedTube — have begun attaching an opt-in notification for visitors from Utah, which says that the state believes pornographic materials can be harmful if viewed by minors."It shows for a lot of businesses, they're more concerned about their pocketbook than they are about being prosecuted," said Rep. Brady Brammer, R-Highland, who sponsored the bill earlier this year.Brammer's bill got national attention, and he faced pushback and threats of lawsuits from the adult entertainment industry when it debuted earlier this year. XHamster, another adult website, even trolled the bill by posting a parody warning on its site for Utah viewers to see.Brammer watered down the original bill, and it passed the legislature. Utah Gov. Gary Herbert, a Republican, allowed it to go into law without his signature.The law allows people to bring a private civil action in court against a site for displaying "obscene" materials, but it would require someone to go to court and have something declared "obscene."A trade group representing the porn industry said it advises websites not to comply with the new law, believing it is still unconstitutional."No matter the message, the First Amendment restricts the government's ability to compel speech. Individual companies may choose to comply because it's easier than facing lawsuits or fines. We've never advised our members to comply, and don't believe this is being done in any widespread manner, but respect that a business may make decisions that limit potential liability," Mike Stabile, a spokesman for the Free Speech Coalition, said in an email. "As with similar, previous legislation in Utah, we'll eventually see the law challenged and overturned, and at no small expense to the Utah taxpayer. That's unfortunate, because that money and energy could be spent educating people about actually effective methods of protection, like parental filters."An email sent to Pornhub requesting comment on why it began posting warning labels was not immediately returned.While no websites have challenged the law in court, Brammer believes it will hold up."So far, it's been a lot of talk. I don't think that they will, if they do bring a legal challenge, I don't think they'll be able to succeed on that," Brammer said. "We have a difference of opinion on that. They haven't felt confident enough yet to bring a legal challenge and most of the companies, rather than make the challenge and spend the money on that, they're complying."Brammer said he ultimately would like to expand the legislation to allow for people to sue an adult website, even if they don't know who owns it.But he said he was not planning to bring that forward in the 2021 legislative session that begins in January. Other states have expressed interest in running similar legislation, he said.Brammer said the warning label law has already alerted parents when their child was re-directed to an adult site, and it's educated them about parental filters.He insisted his bill did not block adults from viewing pornography, just minors."If that's where they want to go, they're going to get there. And I'm not trying to stop that," he said. "But I'm giving them a chance if that's not where they want to go."This story was originally published by Ben Winslow on KSTU in Salt Lake City. 3510
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KGTV) — California will require people to wear face coverings in most indoor settings and outdoors when physical distancing isn't possible.Gov. Gavin Newsom had previously allowed counties to set their own requirements for facial coverings to slow the spread of the coronavirus. San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Francisco already have face-covering mandates in effect. "Simply put, we are seeing too many people with faces uncovered – putting at risk the real progress we have made in fighting the disease," Newsom said. "California’s strategy to restart the economy and get people back to work will only be successful if people act safely and follow health recommendations. That means wearing a face covering, washing your hands, and practicing physical distancing."RELATED: New UCSD study: Wearing masks significantly curbs spread of COVID-19California's cloth face covering mandate includes situations like:While outdoors in public spaces when maintaining a physical distance of six feet from persons who are not members of the same household or residence is not feasible.Inside of, or in line to enter, any indoor public space;Obtaining services from the healthcare sector in settings including, but not limited to, a hospital, pharmacy, medical clinic, laboratory, physician or dental office, veterinary clinic, or blood bank;Waiting for or riding on public transportation or paratransit or while in a taxi, private car service, or ride-sharing vehicle;Engaged in work, whether at the workplace or performing work off-site, when:Interacting in-person with any member of the public;Working in any space visited by members of the public, regardless of whether anyone from the public is present at the time;Working in any space where food is prepared or packaged for sale or distribution to others;Working in or walking through common areas, such as hallways, stairways, elevators, and parking facilities;In any room or enclosed area where other people (except for members of the person’s own household or residence) are present when unable to physically distance.Driving or operating any public transportation or paratransit vehicle, taxi, or private car service or ride-sharing vehicle when passengers are present. When no passengers are present, face coverings are strongly recommended.RELATED: San Diego County exceeds community outbreak limit, forcing pause on reopeningsThe state's order exempts:Children under 2 years old; Individuals with medical, mental health or developmental disability that prevents wearing a face covering;Persons who are hearing impaired, or communicating with a person who is hearing impaired, where the ability to see the mouth is essential for communication;Persons for whom wearing a face covering would create a risk to the person related to their work, as determined by local, state, or federal regulators or workplace safety guidelines.Persons who are obtaining a service involving the nose or face for which temporary removal of the face covering is necessary to perform the service;Persons who are seated at a restaurant or other establishment that offers food or beverage service, while they are eating or drinking, provided that they are able to maintain a distance of at least six feet away from persons who are not members of the same household or residence;Persons who are engaged in outdoor work or recreation such as swimming, walking, hiking, bicycling, or running, when alone or with household members, and when they are able to maintain a distance of at least six feet from others;Persons who are incarcerated. Prisons and jails, as part of their mitigation plans, will have specific guidance on the wearing of face coverings of masks for both inmates and staff.As of Wednesday, California reported 157,015 coronavirus cases and more than 5,200 deaths from the virus.RELATED: Some San Diegans push for end of San Diego County face mask requirement 3926

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - A collective of conservation organizations filed lawsuits Thursday against San Diego County and its board of supervisors for approving a controversial housing development in the Otay Ranch community, with the groups claiming that the development endangers wildlife and the development's future residents. The project known as Adara was approved last month with a 3-2 vote and involves construction of more than 1,000 homes and a commercial village core, along with an elementary school, fire station, sheriff's office, trails, electric vehicle charging stations, solar panels and more than 700 acres of open space and parks. Environmental groups contend that its location, between the city of Chula Vista and rural community Jamul, is home to several endangered and protected plant and animal species and is at exceptional risk for wildfires. Plaintiffs include the Center for Biological Diversity, Preserve Wild Santee, the California Chaparral Institute, Endangered Habitats League, California Native Plant Society and the Sierra Club. ``Building houses in this fire-prone place will put people at risk, and it'll wreak havoc on golden eagles and other wildlife,'' said Peter Broderick, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. ``By approving this sprawl project, officials have put both homeowners and wildlife in danger. They've dealt a big setback to sustainable development in San Diego County.'' In their complaint, the plaintiffs referenced county data identifying ``22 special-status plants and 28 special-status wildlife species'' on the project site. They also allege that the area is especially prone to wildfires, which was noted by Supervisor Dianne Jacob in her dissenting vote on the project. The complaint states the area ``has burned at least 17 times in the last 100 years'' and is ``at serious risk for fast-moving, wind-driven fires.'' The site's steep terrain would make suppressing fires difficult, and homeowners would only have one evacuation route available, according to the plaintiffs. Peter Andersen, chair of the Sierra Club's San Diego Chapter, called the project ``a fire trap that endangers all East County residents, contributes to severe traffic jams and destroys multiple species' habitat,'' while Richard Halsey of the California Chaparral Institute said ``History has shown that during a wind-driven wildfire, developments like this one in a known fire corridor can and have been destroyed by embers flying a mile or more ahead of the flame front. The claim that a development like this is fire safe ignores everything we have learned during the destructive 2017 and 2018 firestorms.'' 2662
SAN DIEGO (CNS) - A fire broke out Wednesday morning at a duplex in Rancho Penasquitos, and responding firefighters confronted cluttered conditions in one of the homes in order to knock down the flames and search for residents, authorities said. 253
SAN DIEGO (AP and CNS) — A white Christmas was in store for parts of California with wet weather elsewhere in the state that could mean dangerous driving conditions and possible power outages."A storm system is coming and after about 10 p.m. tonight, we'll begin having scattered showers that will continue through the day on Christmas," NWS forecaster Samantha Connolly said of the San Diego impact. "The storm system will bring cooler temperatures through tomorrow, and snow above 5,000 feet."Connolly said temperatures will drop into the high 50s to 60s in most of San Diego on Christmas day. She said temperatures in the mountains are expected to dip into the 30s and 40s during the storm.RELATED: Check Your 10News Pinpoint Weather Forecast"We will have gusty winds as well through the day and night," Connolly said. "Wind gusts will be up to 30 mph along the coasts and in the inland valleys, and as much as 50 to 60 mph in the mountains and deserts."One-tenth to one-quarter of an inch of rain is expected along the coast and in the inland valleys and the deserts on Christmas. Half an inch to an inch of rain is expected in the mountains.The NWS forecaster said the storm will leave San Diego later in the day on Christmas. Wednesday, the day after the storm, is expected to be dry. But more light rain could be on the way."We have another potential storm system that could come in on Thursday and Friday," Connolly said. "We're expecting a little rain from that, but not much."The National Weather Service issued a winter weather advisory Monday for higher elevations in San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles, Ventura and Kern counties.The weather service said the fast-moving storm system was expected to move into Southern California late Monday, bringing up to 4 inches of snow to elevations above 4,000 feet (1,200 meters) including Big Bear, Wrightwood and the Grapevine area of Interstate 5.The system also was expected to bring gusty winds between 40 and 60 mph (64 to 97 kph) and a chance of rain at lower elevations.The conditions could create snowy and ice-covered roads with low visibility and strong cross winds. The California Department of Transportation said chains will be required in mountain areas.In Northern California, the weather service issued a flash flood watch for an area of Mendocino County that was charred by wildfires earlier this year.The warning was in effect from noon until 6 p.m. Monday. Motorists traveling along Highway 20 should be on alert for possible road flooding, rockslides and debris flows, it said.The fire in July blackened 717 square miles (1,857 square kilometers), much of it in Mendocino National Forest.The weather service also issued a coastal flood advisory in parts of the San Francisco Bay Area until 2 p.m. Monday because of higher than normal tides.Holiday travelers in parts of the Sierra Nevada could see up to 2 feet of snow in some mountain passes at elevations of about 6,000 feet. Forecasters say that by Tuesday, snow could fall at lower mountain elevations. 3042
来源:资阳报