Cyborg | Designer-Babies | Futurism | Futurist | Immortality | Longevity | Nanotechnology | Post-Human | Singularity | Transhuman

Apr 232014

Quick links to other pages on this site | Still can’t find it? see Site Index

Liberty 4, No. 22 Clemson 3

It was the first meeting at Doug Kingsmore Stadium between Liberty (32-9) and Clemson (24-16) since 1999.

The Tigers took advantage of five walks in the first inning to score two runs, then added another run in the second inning to build a 3-0 lead. But the Flames scored two runs in the third inning after the first two batters of the frame were retired, then Dalton Britt scored on a wild pitch and Danny Grauer followed with a solo homer in the fifth inning to give the Flames the lead over the Tigers, who scored just three of their 17 base runners in the game.

Reliever Shawn Clowers (5-0) earned the win by pitching 2.2 scoreless innings. Ashton Perritt tossed a scoreless ninth inning to record his ninth save of the year. Tiger starter Clate Schmidt (4-6) suffered the loss, as he gave up four runs on five hits and four walks with five strikeouts in 4.2 innings pitched.

The Tigers host Western Carolina on Wednesday at 6:30 p.m.

Login to comment

Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service, Privacy Policy and Parental Consent Form.

Continue reading here:
Liberty gets past Clemson

Political activists decry effort to squelch free speech for campaigns

By Joan Biskupic, Reuters

WASHINGTON U.S. Supreme Court justices across the ideological spectrum voiced doubts on Tuesday about a state law that prohibits false statements during a political campaign.

The Ohio law allows candidates and other citizens to file a complaint for allegedly false slogans, prompting a state election commission hearing and public scrutiny of advocacy groups or individuals claims in the middle of a campaign.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, a Republican appointee, speculated that calling in a groups leaders to justify what (theyre) going to say could impinge on free speech rights under the U.S. Constitutions First Amendment. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a Democratic appointee, observed that simply being forced to defend an advertisement could be costly and diminish speech at a crucial point in a campaign.

The case began with an pro-life advocacy groups provocative claim that a Democratic congressmans vote for President Barack Obamas health care law, known as Obamacare, was a vote to fund abortions, and his attempt to set the record straight.

At its broadest, the dispute tests political speech rights. It has drawn a diverse array of politically active groups who say the government should not try to squelch campaign speech, even when it is audacious and far from the truth.

But the narrow question before the nine justices on Tuesday was whether an organization may challenge a law that arguably suppresses free speech when it is not clear the organization would face prosecution under the law.

The courts answer and wider reverberations from the dispute could affect the kind of political advertising seen in campaigns ahead of Novembers congressional elections. A ruling might also illuminate the coverage for false statements under the First Amendment.

In 2012, the Supreme Court struck down a U.S. law that made it a crime to lie about military honors, but the justices splintered in their speech-rights rationale in that case, United States v. Alvarez.

Original post:
U.S. Supreme Court hears challenge to ban on false campaign speech

MALVERN, Pa., April 22, 2014 /PRNewswire/ –Liberty Property Trust reported that funds from operations available to common shareholders (diluted) ("FFO") for the first quarter of 2014 was $0.58 …

Go here to read the rest:
Liberty Property Trust Announces First Quarter 2014 Results

New Malvinas secretary says Buenos Aires will defend its claim to islands and surrounding waters in international courts Argentina will seek legal punishment, including prison sentences, for anyone who drills for oil in the Falklands and the surrounding waters it claims as its territories, the country's newly created Malvinas secretary has told the Guardian. In his first interview with the …

View post:
Argentina 'will seek to punish' firms that drill for Falklands oil



ConLaw Class 25 – The First Amendment — Speech I
Barron v. Baltimore, New York Times v. Sullivan, Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire.

By: Josh Blackman

Originally posted here:
ConLaw Class 25 – The First Amendment — Speech I – Video



California Waste Plant Minions Suppress First Amendment Infowars Special Report
California Waste Plant Minions Suppress First Amendment Infowars Special Report videos.. Please click here to subscribe to my channel.. California Waste Plan…

By: Economics

Link:
California Waste Plant Minions Suppress First Amendment Infowars Special Report – Video



1st Amendment Doesn't Protect Racist Bankers Calling Indians 'Chimps'
The First Amendment doesn't protect racist bankers who called Indians “chimps” http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/16/first-amendment-doesnt-protect-racist-bankers-who-called-indians-chimps-judge…

By: David Pakman Show

Read the original here:
1st Amendment Doesn’t Protect Racist Bankers Calling Indians ‘Chimps’ – Video



Citing a Celeb in an Ad? The First Amendment May Not Protect You.
Citing a Celeb in an Ad? The First Amendment May Not Protect You.

By: Ganganam Aarya

View post:
Citing a Celeb in an Ad? The First Amendment May Not Protect You. – Video



StarCraft 2: Wings of Liberty #24 – The Last Stand, Part I
Wings of Liberty is the first part of the StarCraft 2 trilogy, and the single-player campaign sets the stage well for what follows after. Join me and Jim Ray…

By: YOGSCAST Rythian

More here:
StarCraft 2: Wings of Liberty #24 – The Last Stand, Part I – Video

Apr 202014

COEUR d’ALENE – “The Second Amendment isn’t about firearms. It’s about freedom,” Brent Regan said.

He stood outside the Gladys Buroker Building at the Kootenai County Fairgrounds on Saturday afternoon, following a speech he gave to a lively crowd at the Patriots’ Day Idaho Oath Keepers Second Amendment Rally.

“Other people don’t have the right to tell you that you can’t defend yourself in certain ways if you’re presented with force,” he said. “The Second Amendment was put in to make sure it was clear that the government shouldn’t infringe on that right, because confiscation was one of the first acts that the British tried to do to subdue colonists.”

Regan, an engineer from Coeur d’Alene, spoke about some issues coming up in the primary election.

“The Idaho lands issue is probably the least understood, but probably one of the most important things that we’ve got,” he said. “I wanted to correct some of the misinformation that’s going on about the state exchange. Those are the two big things.”

He joined at least 150 people in frank discussions about patriotism, liberty, gun rights and the future of the nation.

“We’re here to show our support for many things,” said Oath Keeper Tia Avery of Moyie Springs. “The Second Amendment being probably the first one, as we really do start standing up and fighting back, instead of letting politicians walk on us.”

Avery and Kortni Roy, also of Moyie Springs, held high an American flag and a flag with the words, “Don’t tread on me.” Both women said they are fully trained in firearm use, and Avery pointed out the .45 caliber handgun holstered on her hip.

“People just need to start being more aware,” Roy said. “If they don’t, they’re going to lose it all.”

Roy, who works at a truck stop, said her firearm serves as security.

More here:
'It's about freedom'



SCOTUS HEARING: Anti War Protesters Say Secret Service Violated Their First Amendment Rights
April 16, 2014 C-SPAN http://MOXNews.com ONE TIME ONLY DONATION https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick hosted_button_id=MHT8PM5BPSVC8 $1.00 ONE …

By: wwwMOXNEWScom

Read more:
SCOTUS HEARING: Anti War Protesters Say Secret Service Violated Their First Amendment Rights – Video

B. Scott arrives to the 25th Annual GLAAD in Los Angeles in April 2014.

FORTUNE — In August 2013, transgender television personality B. Scott filed a suit against Black Entertainment Television and its parent company Viacom Inc., claiming that the network had discriminated against him based on his gender identity and sexual orientation.

The lawsuit stemmed from Scott’s appearance as a style correspondent at the 2013 BET awards preshow. After his first segment of the night, in which he appeared with heavy makeup and heels, the network told him to tone down his look and change into masculine clothing that was “different from the androgynous style he’s used to … and comfortable with,” according to the complaint.

A Los Angeles Superior Court judge decided the case Wednesday, and it came down to theFirst Amendment; not Scott’s freedom to speech and expression, but Viacom’s (VIA).The court found that BET’s decision as to how Scott would appear on camera was part of the network’s creative process of developing and broadcasting the show, which is protected by the First Amendment.

MORE:Americans have fallen in love with real estate once again

The case is by no means the first in which a media company has used the First Amendment as a defenseagainst lawsuits alleging discrimination. The order on Thursday cites several other instances.

There was the racial discrimination case against ABC for its failure to feature non-white contestants on The Bachelorand The Bachelorette. A federal district court in Tennessee dismissed the matter after finding that “casting decisions are a necessary component of any entertainment show’s creative content.” The court said that “the plaintiffs seek to drive an artificial wedge between casting decisions and the end product, which itself is indisputably protected as speech by the First Amendment.”

And there was the lawsuit filed against Warner Bros. by a former writers’ assistant for the television show Friendswho asserted that the use of sexually coarse and vulgar language and conduct by the show’s writers constituted sexual harassment. The Supreme Court of California in that case held that “the First Amendment protects creativity.”

The case thatheld greatestprecedent is a matter in which a group of gay, lesbian, and bisexual Irish Americans sought to participate in Boston’s St. Patrick’s Day parade. The U.S. Supreme Court, which ultimately heard the case, ruled that it would be a violation of the First Amendment for Massachusetts to require private citizens “who organize a parade to include among the marchers a group imparting a message the organizers do not wish to convey.”

The defendants in these cases arguedthat they didn’t care what their employees or participants are in reality — gay, straight, male, female — but rather how they appear. “They say, ‘We are entitled to create a program that looks the way we want it to look,’” says Eugene Volokh, a professor at UCLA School of Law. And the courts have agreed with them.

Original post:
To kill bias suits, companies lean on the First Amendment

For the first two years of their lives, tortoises are kept in protective pens to avoid predators. Photo: Jeffrey Marlow

Youre sailing from the Spice Islands across the open ocean to the South American port of Guayaquil, your financial motives rooted somewhere along a broad spectrum of morality and lawfulness. Several months have passed, and food stores and morale are low. Fortunately, you know a spot that will save the day, a cluster of rocky islands jutting out of the east Pacific near the equator.

For centuries, the Galapagos Islands have been a convenience store for ocean-going journeys, the resident Giant Tortoises serving as the perfect solution to the constant challenge of acquiring fresh meat at sea. These enormous beasts could handle the rigors of shipboard life and could be harvested at any time. Ships throughout the 18th-20th centuries would stop at the Galapagos, herd dozens of tortoises onto the decks, and sail off, assured of a reliable protein source for the remainder of their journey. At one point, an American whaling vessel lost track of a captive tortoise, which ambled out of the hold two and a half years later in Nantucket. Befuddled onlookers promptly killed it and made a stew.

And so, slowly but surely, the Giant Tortoise population was decimated. By the mid-1900s, conservationists began to recognize the problem, just as the increasing rate of international tourism and commerce was introducing another mortal threat to the species.

This one came in the form of fire ants, a voracious invasive species with a taste for baby tortoise. Within 20 minutes of hatching, says naturalist Ernesto Vaca, they swarm and make the baby tortoise disappear. Other human-transported pests, like rats, dogs, and cats, have developed similar dietary proclivities. With the species now facing a genuine threat to its survival, the Centro de Crianza was founded on Isabela Island, and conservationists went into crisis mode, airlifting tortoises with helicopters and initiating a breeding program.

It took a while to develop effective breeding techniques, but today, the Centro boasts a near-perfect success rate from egg to teenage tortoise. The rescue program continues in full force, as the habitat surrounding Isabela Islands many dome-shaped volcanoes have been deemed unsafe for tortoises because of the fire ant threat. Employees and volunteers venture into the dense forest to retrieve tortoise eggs, which are then placed into computer-controlled incubators back at the Centro. The sex of the fledglings is determined by egg incubation temperature above 37.5 C leads to females, below produces males allowing the Centro to generate its ideal ratio of 60% females and 40% males. Just before hatching, the eggs are buried in sand to simulate natural conditions and ensure that baby tortoises can dig upward and outward, a capability that bodes well for future robustness. Until the young tortoises are two years old, theyre placed in cages to offer protection against rats. By five, theyre in open-air enclosures, having received microchips that will track their movements once released into the wild.

And that, after all, is the ultimate goal, to repopulate the Galapagos with one of its most iconic species. Already, several hundred adults have been reintroduced to Espanola, an island particularly hard-hit by wave of threats over the decades. But the long-term prognosis is murky, especially as the invasive species that predate upon tortoises continue to grow in numbers. One option is to bolster the invasive species eradication efforts; another is that the animals will merely live the first few years of their lives in controlled conditions. But for now, the stabilization of the Giant Tortoise population is a victory in itself, a promising example of how conservation efforts can bring an organism back from the brink. As human impact on the unique Galapagos ecosystems increases, the model of tortoise rehab may prove useful in protecting other species from extinction, allowing the islands to maintain their unique treasure trove of biodiversity.

Homepage image: Antje Schultner/Flickr

More here:
Inside the Galapagos Islands Giant Tortoise Rehab Effort



WITHOUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT, THE BILL OF RIGHTS IS MEANINGLESS
The First Amendment is the most important amendment to protect, but it's not being championed like the Second Amendment has been. Without the First Amendment…

By: Terry Anderson

See more here:
WITHOUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT, THE BILL OF RIGHTS IS MEANINGLESS – Video



Floyd Abrams: “On the Front Lines with the First Amendment”
Floyd Abrams, described as “the most significant First Amendment lawyer of our age,” interviewed by Ron Collins at the 2014 Virginia Festival of the Book. Ho…

By: Thomas Jefferson Center

Read the original post:
Floyd Abrams: "On the Front Lines with the First Amendment" – Video

Apr 172014



First Amendment Selfie News
How well do you know the First Amendment and what it really means?

By: Kaitlin Chappell

See the original post here:
First Amendment Selfie News – Video

At 10 a.m. next Tuesday, the Supreme Court continues its current fascination with free speech and the First Amendment, exploring at a one-hour hearing when an advocacy group can challengea restriction on election campaign rhetoric. Arguing for two advocacy groups in Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus will be Michael A. Carvin of the Washington, D.C., office of Jones Day, withtwenty minutes of time. If the Court, as expected, permits the federal government to join in the argument, its views will be represented by Eric J. Feigin, an Assistant to the U.S. Solicitor General, with ten minutes. Ohios lawyer at the lectern, with thirty minutes, will be Ohio Solicitor Eric E. Murphy of Columbus.

Background

The attack ad, often used to shamea candidate in an effort to persuade voters, is as common in todays political campaigns as buttons, town hall meetings, andendorsements. But it is not routine for the government to try to police those ads. The state of Ohio and some fifteen others try to do so, however, and that has helped produce the latest First Amendment case for a Supreme Court that currently has a keen interest inthat amendment, especially in campaign settings.

In all of the history of the First Amendment, theCourt has never ruled that false statements are totally without protection under the Constitution. It made the point again (although in a somewhat uncertain ruling that lackeda clear majority) in the decision two years ago in United States v. Alvarez, which took most of the punch out of a federal law making it a federal crime to falsely claim that one had received a military medal. That, too, involved political speech.

But if a group or an individual wants to challenge a law that outlaws speech, how and when is it allowed togo to courtto claim the protection ofthe First Amendment?That is the issue the Court faces next week, in the first case to reach it in which opposition to the new federal health care law became a campaign issue.

When the House of Representatives in 2010 gave its final approval to the Affordable Care Act (now known widely in politics as Obamacare), one of theDemocrats voting for it was Rep. Steven Driehaus, representing an Ohio district that included Cincinnati and its suburbs. Later that year, he campaigned for reelection, but was defeated.

An advocacy group that is opposed to abortions, the Susan B. Anthony List, made an arrangement to put up a billboard in Driehauss district that would proclaim: Shame on Steve Driehaus! Driehaus voted FOR taxpayer-funded abortion. It also aired radio broadcasts with the same message. The billboard never went up, because the company owning the space backed down when a lawyer for the congressman threatened to sue, claiming the message misrepresented his vote.

Driehaus soon pursued a complaint with the Ohio ElectionsCommission, which has the power to recommend prosecution for violations of a state truth-in-politics law. That law has two key provisions:it prohibits anyone from trying to influence voters by intentionally making a false statement about a candidates voting record, and it prohibits the distribution of any false statement about a candidate if the source knew it was false or didnt care whether it was true or false.

The state commission, in a preliminary vote, sided with Driehaus, but before any prosecution by state officials went forward, Driehaus was defeated for reelection, and his complaint was dismissed by the commission at his request.

Susan B. Anthony List then sued in federal court,seeking to strike down the law under the First Amendment. It sued Driehaus and the state commission, along with its members. Thatcase was joined with one filed by an anti-tax group, the Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending and Taxes, which had wanted to send out emails and other materials also attacking Driehaus for allegedly voting for tax-supported abortion. That group said it had held off sending out its messages because it knew of the commission action on Driehauss complaint, and was deterred from speaking out.

Read more from the original source:
Argument preview: Attack ads and the First Amendment



Liberty Quartet (Ride On) 04-13-14
Liberty Quartet's performance of this song was at the First Assembly of God Church in Albany, Oregon, on April 13, 2014. Group members are Royce Mitchell (ba…

By: psalmofpraise

See the article here:
Liberty Quartet (Ride On) 04-13-14 – Video



In The Illuminati Garden – Episode 1
the story starts to unfold as we find out that the pontipines stole the dank and iggle piggle is on a mission my first montage parody so pls no haterino ( …

By: Swagadon420

Go here to read the rest:
In The Illuminati Garden – Episode 1 – Video



Freedom Wars Announcement Trailer
Japan Studio's action-RPG is coming to the West. Get your first glimpse here.

By: IGN

Go here to see the original:
Freedom Wars Announcement Trailer – Video



FireFox! Start Your Own Web Hosting Company
Web Hosting Advertise Here $10 a Month Affordable web-hosting
Pierre Teilhard De Chardin




Designer Children | Prometheism | Euvolution | Transhumanism

Sign up below for the Prometheism / Designer Children Discussion Forum

Subscribe to prometheism-pgroup

Powered by us.groups.yahoo.com