Funny/Strange News Stories

https://www.ktuu.com/content/news/P...ck-eats-pizza-in-front-of-dogs-569694031.html

0416_ground-hog_click.jpg

If reincarnation is in fact true. I now know what I want to come back as.
 
Trump then called Kemp and asked to slow down his plan, to which the governor said no, said the officials. The governor suggested the two men continue to the discussion on another call, but they did not speak again before the briefing in which Trump said he opposed some of the particulars of the plan to reopen.
That's where he screwed up.

4-5 times in a lifetime just isn't as catchy.
It is if you're talking about STDs.
 
Last edited:
'Beijing Bikini' banned under new law

beijing_bikini.jpg


BBC
The Chinese capital has banned the "Beijing Bikini" as part of a new set of laws that will come into effect on 1 June.

The Beijing Bikini refers to the habit of men exposing their belly by rolling up their shirt.

The Global Times, a Chinese newspaper, confirmed the move on Saturday.

Many of the laws appear to be in response to the coronavirus outbreak. Residents in the capital must wear a mask if suffering from a cold or another infectious respiratory disease.

China, where the new coronavirus emerged in December, has reported more than 82,000 cases and 4,632 deaths.
 
not surprised, communists are obsessed with controlling everything ... they should ban spitting, that would make more sense in this virus situation.
It'd interest me to know where you draw the line between laws for which there is no reasonable justification and "controlling everything," and why there.
 
It'd interest me to know where you draw the line between laws for which there is no reasonable justification and "controlling everything," and why there.

and I would be interested to know why you think people shouldn't have with their belly exposed to cool off, or is it only men you don't want to see? :lol:
 
and I would be interested to know why you think people shouldn't have with their belly exposed to cool off, or is it only men you don't want to see? :lol:
It was a joke that, sure, was founded upon the thoroughly unappealing nature of a pudgy Asian man sporting a midriff.

Apart from my employer, who has established a dress code for those wishing to retain their employment (thereby establishing it as not a matter of freedom being infringed upon), the only person I actually tolerate dictating how I dress is my wife, and I don't actually approve of government requiring citizens to dress (or not dress) a certain way.

Your turn.
 
maybe the line is reasonable justification itself?... and personal opinions of course.

I don't know why you ask, are you still going on about imigration laws? :)
I'm talking about control. That is, after all, the aim of the drafting and passage of laws.

You previously came out in favor of laws for which there is no reasonable justification and yet you have an issue with the sort of control the Chinese government wields.

It's...odd.
 
citation needed

... hope you don't mean immigration laws, that would be silly
Silly because you approve of laws that make an individual a criminal simply for existing in a certain place? These are laws for which there is no reasonable justification. You were so fervent in your support of such laws that you cast empty assertions upon those with whom you disagreed, labelling them "for open borders" (mind you this was without any indication as to why open borders are bad, presumably because the dog whistle was enough) and possibly even anarchistic.

There is no reasonable justification for the government to prohibit the wearing of particular clothing, the wearing of clothing in a particular manner, the not wearing of particular clothing or even not wearing clothing at all (I'd argue, despite being a rather modest individual myself), just as there is no reasonable justification for the government to prohibit the presence of any individual on non-private land, save for select instances such as when public health is a legitimate concern and that prohibition has a legitimate effect.

I find it odd that you simultaneously approve and disapprove of control wielded with a heavy hand.
 
@TexRex I will not go into 'who said what' game months after initial discussion

... difference is in reasons used to justify existence of specific laws, there are obvious reasons for immigration laws, failure to comply with the laws makes one criminal. That's how it works.
Maybe chinese communists have real reasons to justify ban of beijing bikini (like hygienic concerns), but from my perspective it's unnecessary restriction of their own citizens. Meanwhile immigration laws are used by governments to protect their citizens.
 
"Illegal migration is a phenomenon that can fundamentally jeopardise the internal stability and security situation in the destination countries."

https://www.mvcr.cz/mvcren/article/migration.aspx?q=Y2hudW09Ng==
So can legal immigration.* That's the justification that has been provided there, but it isn't reasonable.

A governing body may require the individuals they govern to carry on their person, at all times, a head of garlic, a silver ingot and a pair of scissors. The governing body may justify this requirement by saying the items are intended to protect against vampires, werewolves and mummies, respectively. This is not reasonable justification.

*Edit: Oh, for ****'s sake, so can population growth through conventional reproduction within the citizen population.
 
So can legal immigration.* That's the justification that has been provided there, but it isn't reasonable.

A governing body may require the individuals they govern to carry on their person, at all times, a head of garlic, a silver ingot and a pair of scissors. The governing body may justify this requirement by saying the items are intended to protect against vampires, werewolves and mummies, respectively. This is not reasonable justification.

*Edit: Oh, for ****'s sake, so can population growth through conventional reproduction within the citizen population.

I know that statement is not the reason and since there is no country that tried open borders it's all speculation ;).

random google find if you need specific reason:
https://www.researchgate.net/public...migration_on_the_epidemiology_of_tuberculosis
 
I know that statement is not the reason and since there is no country that tried open borders it's all speculation ;).
What? This response is ambiguous, as it was directed at my post in its entirety and not one specific statement.

Wait, illegal immigration is illegal because of tuberculosis? No, that's an argument against the presence of people from one country in another, however that occurs.

An individual from Halifax, Nova Scotia may be vacationing in Venice, Italy. They spend an afternoon basking in the sun on a gondola tour of the picturesque canals as the gondolier belts out pleasant melodies. However, unbeknownst to said gondolier, he's got TB. Those tunes he's singing conceal the fact that spittle laced with the virus are raining down on the unwitting Canadian. The individual returns home and the virus spreads to those close to the individual and then to those close to them.
 
Back