TheSanSabaSongbird

This is correct. Their ruling will be legally binding for all states since federal law supercedes state law as a basic constitutional matter.

I'm not optimistic at all. I'm simply stating the legal reality. If you read any optimism into my statement, that's on you.

Exactly; you don't understand basic game theory. The options you lay out are not in fact part of the equation. If we're playing a game in which you have only two choices, opting for a third make-believe alternative is going to result in a losing outcome every time.

Communism only in the sense that the need for mobility/a nomadic lifestyle means that private property exists only insofar as you can carry it with you. It doesn't work in settled agricultural societies because once a person becomes attached to a specific piece of land as is necessary in agriculture, other types of private property become possible and personal incentives begin to diverge such that the only way to achieve or maintain communism ends up being through coercion.

We have a pretty sweet stadium in downtown Portland. It only holds like 22k give or take, but there's no parking lots and light rail service is basically across the street, so we get a real old-world vibe there. Plus the Timbers Army is probably the biggest and most well-organized supporters group in anglophone North America. A Timbers match is definitely worth the price of admission if you ever get a chance to visit. Preferably on a rainy weeknight if you want the real Pacific Northwest experience.

SF is easily as well-served by public transit as Chicago. It's the 2nd densest city in the US, behind NYC. Between Muni, the streetcars and busses and BART, there's always an easy way to get anywhere in The City. You can even jump on a cable car if that's your thing.

Portland is pretty decent too. Not as good as SF, but you can reasonably get around the entire area on public transportation.

If you're going from LA to SF you're fine. You'd take the Coast Starlight to SJ, then you'd transfer to Cal Train, and that drops you off at the Transbay Terminal in SF which gives you easy access to BART or Muni and all of the streetcar and bus lines. Owning a car in SF is more trouble than it's worth for a lot of people. I never owned one when I lived there.

Granted, SF is one of only a handful of US cities where this is true.

Heading south to LA would probably be a much bigger problem though.

I don't think that's what is being said at all. I think what's being said is that if the future belongs to the next generation, it's in all of our interests that intelligent and responsible people do not simply give up and allow the idiots to dominate the future. In other words, we all have a stake in the coming generations and simply opting out because we find it somehow inconvenient is not a moral decision.

This is not to say that we all need to have kids, but rather, is to say that we shouldn't necessarily fault those who do choose to have them. Again, if the children are our future, it would be nice if at least some of them were raised by responsible, intelligent and well-educated parents.

This is not a controversial opinion.

Fortunately we've had millions of years to evolve coping mechanisms for whatever anxieties we may feel as parents. Given that reproduction is key to life, you probably shouldn't be as surprised as you are.

It's a life-changing experience that is unlike any imagining. I am a much better person for having had a kid. That said, I never found it even remotely terrifying or unpleasant, which is just to say that it's definitely not for everyone.