It's Ghost's world‚ we're all just living in it!

10 Ways God Speaks to Us Today

10 Calming Bible Verses to Cope with Holiday Stress

C.S. Lewis’ ‘Christmas Sermon’ Warned of a World that No Longer Believed in Right and Wrong

William Shakespeare’s work is so timeless‚ even a deer can appreciate it. One man from Canada filmed himself reading the Bard out loud to a local whitetail deer‚ and the result is hilariously wholesome! In the video‚ he reads Sonnet 2 to the four-legged creature‚ whom he describes as “bossy.” It’s an apt characterization‚ as the deer frequently huffs and stomps her feet throughout the reading! Despite the interruptions‚ the man recited the poem beautifully. Even the “bossy” deer had to admit that he’d done a good job with Shakespeare’s words! When he asked her if she’d enjoyed the sonnet‚ she actually nodded her head affirmatively! ViralHog shared the sweet video on YouTube‚ including a quote from the creator. Screengrab from ViralHog/YouTube “The last couple of years I’ve made friends with a lot of whitetail deer in a local park‚” reads the caption of the video. “One of them in particular seems to like it when I read Shakespeare’s sonnets to her‚ and she quite often displays some quite humorous and well-timed responses. This is one of those occasions where she was feeling particularly sassy.” It’s so cool to see animals enjoying beautiful poetry! Did you know that some critters also love music? Watch this animal lover read one of Shakespeare’s sonnets to an appreciative deer in the video below! You can find the source of this story’s featured image here. The post Sassy Deer Loves When Human Friend Reads Shakespeare Sonnets To Her. appeared first on InspireMore.

'No living thing deserves to be discarded like common trash'

The suspects allegedly paid the suspected teen hitman $5000

A little deaf girl has been able to tell Santa all by herself what she wants for Christmas for the first time—thanks to an elf who was trained in sign language. Emily Andrews‚ four‚ was captured in a heartwarming video reeling off her wish list via Melanie Boyeson‚ who acted as an interpreter for the […] The post Deaf Girl Meets Santa Properly for the First Time Thanks to Elf Who Signs appeared first on Good News Network.

In the battle of the sexes‚ there’s one fight that never seems to die: who bears more pain? Childbirth is pretty much the gold standard of “this hurts” in everyday conversation – but ask someone with testicles‚ and they may well think that a swift kick in the balls simply must hurt more. Heck‚ even thinking about it has probably made one or two of you cross your legs in sympathy pain.So‚ which is it? Which set of reproductive organs causes the most anguish? The uterus‚ the testicles – or some secret third option?Getting kicked in the balls: the evidence“It may not have happened to you yet‚” begins WebMD‚ ominously. “But you've probably seen‚ or at least heard‚ that taking a hit in the balls – testicles to be exact – does more than knock the wind out of you.”“Getting hit in the testicles can double you over in pain. It can make you feel sick‚ even vomit‚” it continues. “And if you're hit hard enough‚ it can send you to the hospital.”And not only will getting kicked in the ‘nads hurt between your legs‚ it’ll likely be felt all the way up your belly‚ too. That’s because your testicles originally developed up in your abdomen‚ before dropping to the scrotum shortly before or after birth – and they took a bunch of nerves and tissues with them when they went.But why should such a small (sorry dudes) area be the cause of such a lot of pain? Well‚ it’s a two-part answer‚ but in essence: the balls are pretty much perfectly designed to inflict as much suffering as possible to their owners.Firstly‚ there’s the simple fact that the testicles are a part of your genitalia. They’re used for sex and reproduction‚ in other words – and it’s for that reason that evolution has shoved a whole buttload of nerve endings in there.“At its most basic level‚ you feel pain because of receptors and nerves‚” Nathan Starke‚ urologist and Director of the Men’s Health Clinic at Houston Methodist hospital‚ told Inverse in 2018. “And the reason‚ from an evolutionary standpoint‚ why it hurts so much to get hit in the testicles is that they are the key to producing sperm.”Simply put‚ your body has to make it hurt‚ because otherwise you wouldn’t bother protecting them from stray footballs or irate ex-lovers. And you really do have to protect them‚ because here’s the kicker‚ no pun intended: your gonads are naturally pretty ridiculously undefended.“It is almost unthinkable to ask why ovaries do not descend during embryological development and emerge outside the female’s body cavity in a thin‚ unprotected sack‚” noted a paper published in 2009 in the journal Evolutionary Psychology. “Because of vulnerability to damage‚ insult‚ and temperature variation‚ unprotected ovaries located outside the body cavity would be… [a] serious reproductive disadvantage.”“The same reasoning applies with equal force to the testicles‚” the authors wrote. And yet‚ for various reasons – mostly revolving around the need for sperm to be kept cool until‚ shall we say‚ go-time – the balls insist on hanging outside the body‚ tempting fate.It doesn’t have to be that way – elephants‚ for example‚ keep their testicles inside their body‚ next to their kidneys. But in humans‚ not only did we decide to keep ‘em dangly‚ we went ahead and became bipedal‚ too‚ thus making their position even more precarious.In total‚ then‚ we have an organ that’s naturally sensitive‚ located in a thin sac outside of the body‚ and “protected” by‚ at most‚ a floppy length of hose and some tighty-whiteys. Evolution really had it in for these boys‚ didn’t she?Kicked in the balls: the verdictIt seems clear that getting a swift punt in the peppers seems tailor-made to cause as much pain as possible. Best case? You should feel better in about an hour. Worst case? Full-on death by ballache.Giving birth: the evidenceIt seems silly to try to explain why childbirth might hurt. It’s a process designed to force one human out of another‚ through a pipe whose baseline width is only a little over 3 centimeters (1.2 inches)‚ and it has historically killed something like one in 25 of our foremothers.But what’s strange is that not every species suffers like this. Humans take‚ on average‚ nine hours to give birth the first time they do it – longer than a working day‚ and something like 30 times as long as‚ say‚ a horse. Even compared to our closest relatives in the animal kingdom‚ the great apes‚ our labors are notably painful and complex; humans are the only animal that requires help to give birth‚ and for all our modern technology and hygiene‚ we still suffer much higher rates of maternal and neonatal deaths in childbirth than our wild cousins.“Pound for pound‚ given maternal size‚ we have the longest pregnancies [of the primates]‚ we have the biggest babies and the biggest brains‚” Holly Dunsworth‚ a bioanthropologist at the University of Rhode Island‚ told Discover Magazine in 2022. “[W]e take a lot out of mama during pregnancy and she births a great‚ big‚ gargantuan baby.” Why? Well‚ that’s a good question. While scientists quibble over precisely what weighting to give each of them‚ it mostly comes down to two factors: our big old brains‚ and our upright posture. It’s called the “obstetric dilemma” – the evolutionary push-and-pull between being able to walk and run well‚ and being smart.The hypothesis is not universally accepted – human hips could be much wider than they are without impeding our ability to walk. But they don’t have to be‚ is the thing‚ and evolution is lazy: “What always comes next is‚ ‘then why doesn’t the pelvis get wider to make childbirth easier?’ And my answer is always‚ ‘Because it’s good enough. Witness over seven billion humans on the planet’‚” Dunsworth explained during a presentation on her work.The result? Hours and hours of painful labor and delivery‚ during which your muscles will contract uncontrollably‚ your cervix and vagina will be stretched to their breaking point‚ your bones will literally be shoved out of the way to make room for a moving baby‚ and there’s a genuine chance that you might end up ripping a hole in yourself from your vagina all the way into your anus.“A labor contraction is just one big muscle cramp‚ as the entire uterus contracts‚” Bart Putterman‚ an OB-GYN at Texas Children's Pavilion for Women in Houston‚ told Parents. “And you may perceive that discomfort anywhere that the muscle is contracting.” Well‚ discomfort is putting it mildly: “Some people have contractions that make them double over in pain‚” he admits. “You might feel tightening and cramping‚ along with a backache… It may be because of the position of the baby‚ or sometimes it's just the way the [laboring person] perceives pain.”Which brings up another important part of the experience: the psychological aspect. Sure‚ being kicked in the balls isn’t nice‚ but neither does it last for hours or even days on end‚ get progressively worse over time‚ exhaust your body and mind‚ or‚ frankly‚ taunt you for nine months beforehand. Nearly two-thirds of US women report a pathological fear of giving birth – it’s so common as to have a name: tokophobia – and with fair reason‚ really‚ since about 33 per 100‚000 of them will die because of it (and no‚ that number is not getting better.)Even after giving birth‚ the pain isn’t over. If you’ve ever seen one of those donut-shaped cushions and thought “huh‚ who’s using them?” the answer is‚ in a lot of cases‚ people who have just given birth. Even if you didn’t tear up your vagina and need stitches in what is one of the most sensitive places on the human body‚ it’s still recovering from an incredible ordeal‚ and soreness is to be expected. Meanwhile‚ those contractions are still going‚ for some goddamn reason – well‚ okay‚ it’s to stop you from dying from excessive blood loss and to get your uterus back to its regular‚ non-increased-in-volume-by-500-times size‚ but that doesn’t mean they don’t rankle. Wasn’t this supposed to be over already??Giving birth: the verdictIt’s literally hours of pushing a human being out of your genitalia. The only way it could be worse is if you were a hyena.And the winner is…Look. The problem with pain is‚ it’s subjective – what’s torture for one person may be a tickle for another. Testes owners may point at mothers-of-four and conclude that giving birth can’t be that painful‚ really‚ if you agreed to do it multiple times‚ but to that we need only reply: ball-busting kink.Luckily‚ there’s a cop-out answer that is guaranteed to disappoint everyone: it’s a tie. And hey‚ at least we can all be thankful it’s not kidney stones.

No one should trust our “mainstream media” in defining where the “center” of politics from their perch on the left-wing fringes. No one should trust them to define who is “nonpartisan” and who is “independent.” The way they classify political actors is subtle‚ and yet blatantly unfair and unbalanced. Reporters describe the groups they like as "nonpartisan" or in ameliorative terms like "civil rights groups" to persuade low-information voters that their side of the debate is more reliable and conscientious. On Tuesday morning‚ Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a new law allowing the state’s law-enforcement agencies to arrest illegal immigrants. NBC called it “controversial” and noted the Biden White House called it “extreme.” NBC then described Abbott’s leftist opponents: “Civil rights groups have threatened to sue.” A similar line emerged on ABC: ”Immigration rights organizations say they are already preparing to file a lawsuit because this encourages racial profiling.” On Monday morning‚ taxpayer-subsidized National Public Radio’s top-of-the-hour newscast reported that voters in Chile rejected a rewrite of the nation’s constitution. A reporter explained "The charter was largely drawn up by conservatives‚ and activists pointed out language they warned could threaten the already precarious access to safe abortions in Chile.” The staunch abortion backers are just “activists”? Monday’s Politico “Playbook” team touted a new “pro-ESG play.” ESG stands for “environmental‚ social‚ and governance” principles for corporations. The Left forces “woke” ESG standards on investors. Politico reported a group calling themselves “Unlocking America’s Future” is launching a $10 million campaign to defend against ESG critics‚ calling them a “nonpartisan group.” They mentioned Zac Petkanas‚ but didn’t note he runs Petkanas Strategies LLC‚ a Democratic strategic consulting firm. He touts his stints for Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid on Twitter. They mentioned Josh Schwerin‚ but not his firm Schwerin Strategies. Likewise‚ on Twitter he touts his service with Hillary‚ Terry McAuliffe‚ and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. They mentioned Erika Gudmundson‚ and rinse and repeat: She touts working for Hillary‚ for Chelsea Clinton‚ and for the Clinton Foundation. "Nonpartisan" does not fit. This dishonesty underlines what I call Graham’s Law of Labeling: "The epic political battles of our time are fought between the ultraconservatives and the nonpartisans." Maybe I'll make T-shirts. This tactic has been going on for many years. In my first weeks as a full-time media critic in 1989‚ I researched how the nation’s leading newspapers and news magazines described Washington think tanks. The liberal Brookings Institution drew an ideological label just ten times in 737 news stories (1.4 percent). By dramatic contrast‚ the Heritage Foundation was accurately described as "conservative" or a similar term in 217 of 370 stories (58.6 percent). The Los Angeles Times attached a conservative label 71 times in 79 stories (89.9 percent). Time magazine perfectly demonstrated the tilt in their December 6‚ 1988 issue: "Neither [George H.W.] Bush nor the nation will risk serious damage if he ignores the recommendations of groups ranging from the archconservative Heritage Foundation to the Brookings Institution."  During the 1990 campaign‚ an article in Time magazine called Sen. Jesse Helms an “ultra-right conservative‚” but described his liberal Democrat opponent Harvey Gantt simply as “former Charlotte mayor.” In 2019‚ Time described presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg as “a happily married‚ devoutly Christian family man who happens to be gay." There’s nothing wrong with accurately describing conservatives. There’s everything wrong with dressing up the leftist opposition as the “nonpartisans” who love “civil rights” and “immigrant rights.” It’s as loaded as conservatives versus the “independent fact-checkers.” Media consumers need to be aware that they can’t rely on the Old Media for truth in packaging.