u/Officer_Hops

By that logic he could never ask for more custody because he failed to ask for more custody yesterday. I don’t see why it’s not equally likely that he is excited for the new baby and decided he wants to spend more time with current child and the whole family. The assumption here that a dad can’t simply want more time with their child is insulting.

I don’t think it’s about spending more time with his kid, when he has a new baby on the way.

What’s that supposed to mean? It seems like you’re implying OP can’t want to spend more time with their existing child because they’re planning to have another. That’s insane if that’s what you mean to say.

Why would there be a 10 second runoff?

It’s disingenuous to say the AG didn’t oversee the DOJ until after the Civil War. Prior to 1870, the AG’s responsibilities were to argue cases at the Supreme Court (now the responsibility of the SG) and provide legal advice to the executive (now the responsibility of White House counsel). If you remove the responsibility for oversight of the DOJ, the AG has functionally no responsibility left.

Incapacitating the captain is the most challenging part of the plan. Once you do that, it shouldn’t be all that challenging to actually crash the plane. So it makes sense to attack the captain earlier in the flight rather than waiting and potentially drawing suspicion.

We know people WILL do illegal drugs. States have a choice to either create spaces to do drugs safely or morally preen about how upright they are and pass laws classifying drugs as illegal. Is the state opportunistic and disgusting in this case?

Making drugs illegal reduces drug use. Refusing to work with states to provide lethal injection drugs reduces executions. Refusing to participate in an activity you view as morally reprehensible is a normal reaction and shouldn’t be viewed as an indictment.

No, it is not.

By the same logic, is every American responsible for the war with Iran?

How would this fall under unjust enrichment? The company set a price and the consumer paid it. Even if it were, you can’t meaningfully break down the tariff component of the price among labor, materials, etc. If a business’s supply costs increase and they raise prices to compensate, then supply costs decline but they keep the price stable, would you argue that is unjust enrichment?

It’s similar but the mechanics are different. In the NBA you can go over the soft cap to do things like re-sign your own players and the luxury tax is a punishment for spending over the soft cap. In the MLB, the luxury tax is a punishment for spending over the tax line but there is no cap so you don’t need to do anything special to go over. MLB’s system is also not as harsh to tax teams as the NBA’s is under the new CBA which will make the 2nd apron a hard cap equivalent for most teams.

Justifying a failure to provide SNAP benefits today because there may be a hurricane tomorrow ignores that there is a legitimate need for the funds today and the future emergency may not arrive. It’s a bit like refusing to drink water when stranded in the desert because you don’t know how long you’ll be there and then dying of dehydration.