徐州那家医院可以做四维(徐州孕妇做四维有用吗) (今日更新中)

CA?ON CITY, Colo. – Thousands have come through the gates of the Colorado Territorial Correctional Facility. But what happens when they walk out? The prison has dozens of programs meant to help the inmates become valued members of society. One program – involving dogs – is called the Prison Trained K-9 Companion Program. Lawrence Trujillo and Zachery Montoya are master dog trainers. They've have been training dogs at the corrections center for five years. “We are with these dogs seven days a week, 24 hours a day,” Trujillo said. They teach the dogs how to follow commands, and how to be on their best behavior. It’s a very coveted job. “Some of these guys haven’t seen a dog in 20 years,” Montoya said. However, getting into the program isn’t easy. “In order to be considered they actually have to apply for the job. They have to meet certain criteria – they have to have a GED – because we’re required them to read information and process it. And they have to be on their best behavior documented for at least six months," K-9 supervisor Michele Wayland said. According to Wayland, it takes about a year to achieve a master handler certification. “We get a dog buddy, and we learn from a master trainer. We go through about 14 months of book work, we have tests in their monthly – hands on tests with the dogs as we progress as trainers – and we have to pass each one of those tests to become a master trainer,” Trujillo said. The guys say they gain more than just life skills. They're also helping families who haven’t been able to effectively train their dogs. “Coming to prison is not so fun, but being able to give something back is very rewarding,” Montoya said. Since the program was created in 2002, inmates have trained nearly 13,000 dogs. A majority of them come from private families who help fund the program through boarding and training fees. “There is no taxpayer dollar supporting this program, so we have to float our own boat,” Wayland said. The program has seen a lot of success the past couple decades. Wayland says Colorado was one of the first, if not the first state to start K-9 training at prisons. Now, they're all across the country. “There actually is a K-9 program in prisons in every state of the union,” Wayland said. The positive results of the program can be seen in the inmates who are hired. “I didn’t have a lot of skills before I came to prison, so this is something I could definitely I could take with me and do out there. There’s been many guys who have left and have been successful doing this one the streets,” Montoya said. Whether working at a shelter, a kennel, or starting their own training business, both Montoya and Trujillo say they’d love to continue working with dogs once they get out of prison. It's something that wouldn’t be possible without the help of dog owners“We would just like – probably as a team – to thank them for their support and appreciate the trust they have in us,” Trujillo said. 2973

Pedro Rios says the idea that immigrants are coming to this country solely to be a burden to the United States is absolutely false. Rios is the Executive Director of American Friends Service Committee – a national organization that has worked on immigration and border issues for 42 years. He says he is against a new rule that disqualifies immigrants from a green card if they use certain government benefits, because he says it's causing people to drop out of benefit services they do qualify for. “In this case, prenatal care is not a targeted benefit. However, someone might decide to stop receiving that care simply because they fear that it would place them at the crosshairs of some sort of immigration enforcement operation,” Rios said. Dulce Garcia, an immigration attorney and DACA recipient, agrees with Rios. She says the rule has a two-fold impact: it denies more people the ability to qualify as a legal permanent resident, and now people are afraid of accessing other public benefits. She knows from personal experience when her family had to live inside a car and with very little food. “We’re going to see more people like my parents who were afraid of accessing public benefits and decided to risk our health essentially by remaining unsheltered and by struggling with food,” Garcia said. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a food program that's among those included in the rule. If immigrants collect those benefits more than 12 months in three years, they can't get a green card - and become a permanent resident. “We all fall on hard times. My family fell on hard times, and I wish that we would have had people telling us ‘it’s OK, it’s OK to receive help’ so that we would be safe.” As the executive director of Border Angels, a nonprofit that advocates for the immigrant community, Garcia says she tries to empower immigrants with accurate information so they know what benefits they’re still eligible for. However, there are people in favor of the rule, like Agnes Gibboney, who was born in Hungary. Her family entered the U.S. in 1970. “When we immigrated to the U.S., my parents had to sign a document stating they would not apply for any public assistance. That my father could support my mother, my brother and myself,” Gibboney said. Gibboney says she doesn't like the idea of immigrants using taxpayer dollars for services. “The importance of being fully vetted is for the government to know who is coming into this country. To make sure you are of good moral standing, to make sure you’re going to be a good citizen, and make sure that you’re gonna be a plus to this country,” Gibboney said. When it announced the new rule, the Department of Homeland Security called self-sufficiency a core American value. On the other hand, Rios says public benefits might be necessary in order for some immigrants to eventually become self-sufficient.“What we’ve seen in the past is when their needs aren’t being met, then it’s harder for them to support themselves in other ways,” Rios said.  3052

It’s a beautiful, sunny day in Fort Collins, Colorado. Maybe you want to take your shirt off. Well now, men and women both can show a little skin in the city. Or actually… anywhere in Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico, Kansas or Oklahoma. That’s because of a recent court decision, one the city of Fort Collins decided not to fight. It’s a big deal for Brit Hoagland and many women who say it’s their right to wear or not wear a shirt. “Addressing small parts of inequality can make a big difference in how people are treated on a day to day basis, and I thought free the nipple was just one small step closer to how it should be,” said Hoagland. Brit, along with co-plaintiff Samantha Six, sued the city of Fort Collins for the right to go topless in public. It’s part of the #FreeTheNipple movement you might have seen trending on Instagram. Andy McNulty is their attorney and says the law is an attack on equal rights. “Any law that says, ‘Women are prohibited from,’ is unconstitutional and really just intolerable in a society that should treat women as equal to men,” said McNulty. “Everybody should be able to be comfortable on a hot day and if that means taking their shirt of so be it. No matter how you look, you should have the same freedom at the person next to you. And it’s also about equality,” said Hoagland. “They had been advocating for a while, trying to get the Fort Collins City Council to get rid of a female topless ban in Fort Collins. They’d been unsuccessful, and they wanted to see if we would be willing to represent them in a legal challenge to that ordinance,” said McNulty. After the courts ruled in favor of nudity, the city appealed to the federal 10th Circuit of Appeals. That court also ruled in favor of topless women. Fort Collins decided they were not going to try and win at the US Supreme Court. “I think the council as they articulated in their 4-3 vote, really just thought as a matter of priority, no guarantee of success or that the supreme court would even take it up, that the money was just better spent on other city priorities,” said Tyler Marr, deputy director of information for the city of Fort Collins. And that means laws banning women from being topless are not enforceable in all six states in the 10th District. “We made a huge impact way beyond Fort Collins, and we were just trying to start a conversation. And that conversation reached to so many more people. It’s a miraculous achievement I didn’t think I would see in my lifetime let alone so soon,” said Hoagland. But that’s not to say there aren’t some mixed feelings. “I guess as a woman, I mean, I do think we deserve equal rights in everything, so I guess that would count too. But I think if women do choose to do that, they might be asking for a little bit of trouble,” said Peg Williams of Boulder, Colorado. “Just seems like a contradictory of laws a woman can expose her breasts, but a man can’t go in an alley behind a dumpster and take a pee without coming up on criminal charges,” said George Langel of Fort Collins. However, it’s not all bare breasts and roses. In 2017 the 7th circuit of appeals ruled to uphold Chicago’s topless ban. That means there’s two districts in the country with opposing views on the matter. If more lawsuits pop up around the country, the supreme court may have to rule on the issue after all. McNulty says it’s an important issue about equality and how we look at women. “The idea that women’s bodies are purely sexual is something that, it was perpetuated by this law. By getting rid of this law, we are saying women are more than just a sexual object and their bodies are more than just a sexual object. They’re human beings just like men.” “Our win can show that even in other places that, there’s still hope, and that things can change maybe from a different angle,” said Hoagland. And they think that, is a battle worth fighting. 3927

Ahead of the 2020 general election on Nov. 3, social media platforms like Facebook are encouraging everyone to vote or register to vote if they haven't.Those reminders can get a little annoying, especially if you have already voted or are already registered to vote with plans on voting.There are ways to turn them off, and one viral post on social media shows you how. We tried it and it does work.First, hit the three lines on the bottom right bar of the Facebook mobile app. Then scroll all the way down to "see more." After hitting "see more, continue scrolling until you see "Town Hall" and click on it. After hitting Town Hall, click on "Settings" in the top right.Finally, you can see the "voting reminders" as the last option on the screen. Toggle the button from on to off. This article was written by WXYZ. 897

AUSTIN, Texas – Inside a restaurant called “The Pita Shack,” Ayman Attar Bashi recreates part of his culture through the food served in his restaurant. “We are lucky,” he said. He and his family are lucky because a decade ago, they fled violence in Iraq, becoming refugees and resettling in Austin, Texas. “To be a refugee is not a choice,” he said. “Not a choice.” Refugees like Ayman, though, may no longer be able to count on Texas for a fresh start. Governor Greg Abbott said the state has already done more than its fair share. In a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Gov. Abbott said that since 2010, “…roughly 10% of all refugees resettled in the United States have been placed in Texas.” He added that, “in addition to accepting refugees all these years, Texas has been left by Congress to deal with disproportionate migration issues resulting from a broken federal immigration system.” “There had been 41 other governors that had had come out and said, ‘yes, our state we would love to continue to accept refugees’ and that was a mix of Democrats and Republican governors, and so Gov. Abbott was the very first who had said no,” said Russell Smith, with Refugee Services of Texas, the largest resettlement agency in a state. Last year, Texas took in 2,227 refugees – the most of any state. It was followed by Washington, with 1,930 and California with 1,802. Overall, America is admitting fewer refugees. Back in 2016, President Barack Obama set a limit of 110,000 for the 2017 fiscal year. This year, President Donald Trump is setting a limit of 18,000. Though a judge put a temporary stop to the Texas plan, the potential for refugees to be rejected looms large here. “Every action has negatively affected resettlement at the same time,” Smith said. Whether the plan eventually goes through – or gets permanently rejected by the courts – remains to be seen. Back at his restaurant, Ayman says he and his family feel safe and welcomed in Austin. “You’re an active element in this community because we’re hiring people, we are providing people with good food, spread our culture – at the end of the day, you feel like you are doing a lot of good things in this community,” he said.The Trump administration has not said yet whether it will seek to appeal the federal judge’s decision, which stopped Texas from refusing refugees. 2356

来源：资阳报