This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn More
Got It!
YubNub Social YubNub Social
    #cosplay #costume #outfit #weatherproof #unique
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Night mode
  • © 2025 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode
Community
News Feed (Home) Popular Posts Events Blog Market Forum
Media
Headline News VidWatch Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore Jobs Offers
© 2025 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Group

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

Jobs

Country Roundup
Country Roundup
31 w

Luke Combs Reveals a Shocking Lifestyle Change
Favicon 
tasteofcountry.com

Luke Combs Reveals a Shocking Lifestyle Change

Combs is opening up about the eating changes he has made to better his mental health. Continue reading…
Like
Comment
Share
Country Roundup
Country Roundup
31 w

Chris Young Leaves His Longtime Record Label Home
Favicon 
tasteofcountry.com

Chris Young Leaves His Longtime Record Label Home

Chris Young had been with Sony Music Nashville's RCA Records since 2006. Continue reading…
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
31 w

The List: Here's Who the Biden WH Is Eyeing for More Shocking Pardons as Jan 20 and Justice Draw Near
Favicon 
www.westernjournal.com

The List: Here's Who the Biden WH Is Eyeing for More Shocking Pardons as Jan 20 and Justice Draw Near

It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas ... if, that is, you're a Democrat. Oh, sure, the lead-up to Thanksgiving was pretty lousy, what with losing the White House and both chambers of Congress. But now that outgoing President Joe Biden gave a blanket pardon to his son so...
Like
Comment
Share
Conservative Voices
Conservative Voices
31 w

The Election Is Finally Over, But Now Trump Faces a New Problem That Threatens America First Agenda
Favicon 
www.westernjournal.com

The Election Is Finally Over, But Now Trump Faces a New Problem That Threatens America First Agenda

The final U.S. House race was just called in a Democrat's favor, meaning House Republicans will kick off the new year with a razor-thin majority of just 220 to 215. On Tuesday -- 30 days after Election Day -- Democrat Adam Gray unseated incumbent Republican Rep. John Duarte in California’s...
Like
Comment
Share
The People's Voice Feed
The People's Voice Feed
31 w

Gates & Bezos’ Plan To Inject The Food Supply
Favicon 
thepeoplesvoice.tv

Gates & Bezos’ Plan To Inject The Food Supply

It will come as no surprise to learn that Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos have invested heavily in “climate vaccines“. The pair are bankrolling the development of a vaccine designed to reduce the methane produced [...] The post Gates & Bezos’ Plan To Inject The Food Supply appeared first on The People's Voice.
Like
Comment
Share
NEWSMAX Feed
NEWSMAX Feed
31 w ·Youtube News & Oppinion

YouTube
Pete Hegseth is the door kicker we need: Rep. Mark Alford | Wake Up America
Like
Comment
Share
Independent Sentinel News Feed
Independent Sentinel News Feed
31 w

CBS President Who Fired Catherine Herridge Was Ousted
Favicon 
www.independentsentinel.com

CBS President Who Fired Catherine Herridge Was Ousted

Ingrid Ciprián-Matthews, a three-decade veteran of CBS News who ascended to the presidency in 2023 as a perfect DEI, abruptly announced Wednesday that she will step down as the news organization’s parent company prepares for a complex merger. “No journalist wants to ‘be’ the news, especially me. But today, I have some news to share,” […] The post CBS President Who Fired Catherine Herridge Was Ousted appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.
Like
Comment
Share
BlabberBuzz Feed
BlabberBuzz Feed
31 w

Uh Oh! AOC Has Her Eyes Set On A New Position!
Favicon 
www.blabber.buzz

Uh Oh! AOC Has Her Eyes Set On A New Position!

Like
Comment
Share
The Lighter Side
The Lighter Side
31 w

Toddler Who “Wasn’t Tired” Found Snoozing In The Most Hilarious Spot
Favicon 
www.inspiremore.com

Toddler Who “Wasn’t Tired” Found Snoozing In The Most Hilarious Spot

The Beeston Bunch lives on social media. Mom Lauren (Lo) documents the family’s life on several social outlets. The family includes Dad Tanner, big sister Ozzy, and toddler Stella. As with every internet family, they have their ups and downs. One thing that never changes is that the parents should always worry when a toddler is quiet. This time, it was just an unscheduled toddler nap, but most of the time, it means they’re into something terrible. @lobeeston Took 30 minutes to wake her from this slumber hahah ♬ original sound – Lo Beeston After refusing a nap and declaring she “wasn’t tired,” Lo allowed Stella to continue playing. When things got quiet, Lo went in search of the wee child. Any parent knows the rule: a quiet toddler is usually up to nothing good. Fortunately for Lo, she found her toddler taking a nap. The position Stella ended up in is hilarious: face down at the bottom of the steps. From the top, it looks as if she took a tumble and might not be breathing down there. A closer inspection revealed that the toddler was taking a nap in an odd spot. Image from TikTok. Toddlers are famous for trying to avoid napping. We’ve seen a young boy try to fake snoring to trick his mom into letting him go outside to play. One rule parents should learn is that when your toddler has a nap, you should also have a nap. These parents discovered that kids would do almost anything to avoid sleep, including putting Dad to sleep. Lauren admitted in the video caption that it took 30 minutes to wake Stella from this unintentional nap. When they drop from exhaustion, toddlers nap like there is no tomorrow. They will wake fully recharged and prepared to exhaust their adults soon! Please share. You can find the source of this story’s featured image here. The post Toddler Who “Wasn’t Tired” Found Snoozing In The Most Hilarious Spot appeared first on InspireMore.
Like
Comment
Share
Living In Faith
Living In Faith
31 w

The FAQs: Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Transgender Minors Case
Favicon 
www.thegospelcoalition.org

The FAQs: Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Transgender Minors Case

What just happened? On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in United States v. Skrmetti, an important case that will determine whether states have the right to protect children from medical attempts to change their bodies for the purpose of “affirming” gender identity. What is the case about? Last year Tennessee passed a law (known as SB1) that declares the state “must take action to protect the health and welfare of minors” and that it has a “compelling interest in encouraging minors to appreciate their sex, particularly as they undergo puberty.” The law prohibits doctors from prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapy or performing surgery (a ban not at issue before the justices) for the purpose of “affirming” the gender identity of a minor. It does permit doctors to prescribe identical medications for other medical conditions. Physicians can still administer puberty blockers to treat precocious puberty, and hormone therapy remains available for adolescents experiencing delayed onset of puberty. A legal challenge against the ban was initiated by three transgender adolescents and their families, who sued state officials charged with enforcing the legislation (the named respondent, Jonathan Skrmetti, is attorney general of Tennessee). They contend that the law violates constitutional equal protection rights. The Biden administration subsequently joined the litigation, exercising its authority to intervene in equal protection cases that the U.S. attorney general deems to have broad public significance. A federal district court in Nashville granted the challengers’ request to temporarily put the ban on hold. On review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed and upheld the ban. It applied a standard known as “rational basis” review, which looks at whether the law is rationally related to a legitimate government interest. The Biden administration and the three families petitioned the Supreme Court to examine the Sixth Circuit’s ruling. While the Court agreed to hear the federal government’s appeal, it declined to consider the families’ separate petition, which had raised additional questions about parental rights in medical decision-making. An attorney representing the families still presented arguments alongside the government’s case during the oral arguments. The plaintiffs contend that the ban on puberty blockers and hormone therapy “explicitly classifies based on sex” and is therefore subject to heightened scrutiny—a more demanding level of scrutiny than the rational basis review that the Sixth Circuit applied. They claim it’s similar to the Supreme Court’s landmark 2020 ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County. In that decision, a 6–3 majority, with Justice Gorsuch writing the opinion, established that workplace discrimination protections based on “sex” extend to discrimination against homosexual and transgender employees. Gorsuch reasoned that discrimination against LGBT+ individuals is inherently tied to sex-based discrimination since you cannot have one without the other. The plaintiffs argue this same legal logic naturally extends to the Constitution’s equal protection guarantees. On the other side of the issue, Tennessee includes several arguments in defense of the law: Age-based classification: The state argues the law isn’t an outright ban but rather a classification based on age, focusing on protecting minors younger than 18. Protection from risky, unproven treatments: Tennessee claims the law prohibits “risky, unproven gender-transition interventions” for minors. Scientific uncertainty: The state points to “scientific uncertainty” surrounding gender-affirming treatments for young people. European precedent: Tennessee cites tightened restrictions on such treatments in some European countries to support its position. Regret and harm: The state references “firsthand accounts of regret and harm” from individuals who’ve discontinued or reversed gender-affirming treatments. Premature decision-making: Tennessee argues its law protects young people from making treatment decisions prematurely. The state maintains that these arguments justify its position in restricting these medical interventions for minors, framing the law as a protective measure rather than discrimination. What is the legal question being considered in this case? This is the question presented before the Supreme Court: Whether Tennessee Senate Bill 1 (SB1), which prohibits all medical treatments intended to allow “a minor to identify with, or live as, a purported identity inconsistent with the minor’s sex” or to treat “purported discomfort or distress from a discordance between the minor’s sex and asserted identity” . . . violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. If the law is considered unconstitutional, it could affect similar laws in 23 other states. What was the reaction of the justices during the oral arguments? The Court’s liberal justices strongly sided with the Biden administration and the three families. Justice Elena Kagan challenged Tennessee’s core argument—echoed by her conservative colleagues—that the law isn’t sex-based. Meanwhile, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson repeatedly expressed concern about deferring the issue to legislators. However, the Court’s conservative wing appeared skeptical during the oral arguments, with several justices suggesting these matters might be better left to state legislatures. “It seems to me that it’s something where we are extraordinarily bereft of expertise,” said Chief Justice John Roberts. Justice Brett Kavanaugh aligned with Roberts’s perspective, questioning the courts’ role in this debate. “Why isn’t it best to leave it to the democratic process?” he asked. Justice Amy Coney Barrett noted that the parents could still pursue their parental rights claim regardless of the Court’s ruling. Justice Gorsuch didn’t ask any questions. Why is this case important? This case represents a critical intersection of religious liberty, parental rights, medical ethics, and the government’s role in health-care decisions. But at its heart, the case is about protecting the welfare of vulnerable children. Tennessee’s law addresses a troubling shift in pediatric care, where some medical practitioners now advocate interventions that fundamentally alter healthy adolescent development and reproductive capacity. Rather than healing illness, these procedures irreversibly modify healthy bodily functions and tissues, contradicting both traditional medical principles and God’s created order. Labeling such interventions as “medical care” distorts their true nature. As the Family Action Council of Tennessee notes in their amicus curiae brief, “This sort of endeavor is ‘medicine’ only in the sense that doctors, scalpels, and drugs are involved.” The surge in gender dysphoria diagnoses points not to a medical trend but to a deeper spiritual and cultural crisis. While the medical establishment rushes to normalize these interventions, evidence of their risks continues to mount. For instance, the Cass Review confirms what faith leaders have long maintained: children lack the maturity for such life-altering decisions, and research supporting these procedures remains inadequate. As Christians, we must be truthful and compassionate. While some adolescents genuinely struggle with their identity, encouraging medical transition serves neither their health nor their ultimate well-being. True healing affirms rather than alters our God-given bodies, and states have a legitimate interest in protecting children from experimental procedures that contradict both sound medicine and sacred truth. Tennessee’s law provides necessary safeguards for vulnerable youth. The Supreme Court should recognize there is no rational basis for overriding states’ vital role in protecting children from harmful interventions. To rule otherwise would not only exceed the scope of their authority but also force states to stand idle while children undergo irreversible medical procedures they may deeply regret in adulthood. Our children deserve better than to be subjects in a vast social experiment with lifelong consequences. When will the case be decided? A decision is expected by the end of June or early July 2025.
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 1128 out of 56666
  • 1124
  • 1125
  • 1126
  • 1127
  • 1128
  • 1129
  • 1130
  • 1131
  • 1132
  • 1133
  • 1134
  • 1135
  • 1136
  • 1137
  • 1138
  • 1139
  • 1140
  • 1141
  • 1142
  • 1143

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund