Not just the color, but
"Black spheres resting in the hot sun will form a thermal blanket speeding evaporation as well as providing a huge amount of new surface area for the hot water to breed bacteria," said Matt MacLeod, founder of the California biotech firm Modern Moon Farms. "Disaster. It’s going to be a bacterial nightmare.”
This will call for popcorn:
Glory Johnson’s request for $20,000 a month in temporary spousal support from Brittney Griner was denied in an Arizona court Thursday. Maricopa County Superior Court Commissioner Jacki Ireland stated that Griner, after only a 28-day marriage to Johnson, is not responsible for any financial support after the annulment. This decision comes on the heels of Johnson’s announcement earlier this week that she is pregnant with twins.
Another hearing is scheduled to take place Sept. 23, but before that, the court told the two that mediation needs to take place to deal with community property. Also, the court stated that Johnson could seek child support after the twins are born, even though Griner alleges that she was unaware that Johnson’s in vitro fertilization was successful or that she had undergone treatments.
So, the one should be responsible for child support when she didn't even know the other was getting fertilized?
And, considering some past idiot rulings, I hope the sperm donor is anonymous, or she's likely to be hitting him up for support if the other thing doesn't pan out.
Or maybe even if it does.
Remember that idiot New Yorker article on the troubles with free speech? FIRE has a response in 12 points. Here's part of one:
9. "Free-speech advocates typically claim that the value of unfettered expression outweighs any harm it might cause, offering assurances that any such harm will be minimal. But what makes them so sure? ... Some kinds of free speech really can be harmful, and people who want to defend it anyway should be willing to say so."
Free speech advocates do acknowledge that protected speech can hurt feelings. Sometimes, that's the point. FIRE frequently quotes the Supreme Court's decision in Terminiello v. Chicago (1949) for the idea that expression is often crafted to have a significant emotional impact:
Accordingly, a function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea.