There are some Christian sects (?cults?) who can't donate or accept donated cells. From memory the (inaccurately named) Christian Scientists are one. I think (but I'm too tired right now to check) they can accept blood plasma because there's no cells in it.
While I generally don't agree with Americans over what the government's job is - I have to agree with this one. I'm sure there are better ways that the government can involved in dealing with the obesity problem.
They are difficult comparisons as in the UK the equivalent of president (the Prime Minister) sits in the Houses of Parliament. My comparison was derived from the fact that the House of Lords is the second house - much like the Senate. Just about there, the comparisons end.
You are aware that the Tories in the UK are most definitely not Liberal. Right? That would be like describing Rick Santorum as a Liberal and a socialist.
This is why I always use Bittorrent to download Linux ISOs (and seed them afterwards). Often these organisations are not for profit or at least trying to make a small profit. Why would I put a small dent into their costs by using their bandwidth when I can use some of theirs and a lot of other peoples who (like me) are willing to share the pain? Fortunately I'm with a flat rate ISP, but I would still continue to seed even if I weren't.
I know f all about UK vs British vs Scottish law so I could be wrong, but according to the obligatory wikipedia reference Scotland only got their Parliament in 1999. Surely both aforementioned acts would be part of the Scottish law, at least until Scotland decides to repeal them?
While I agree with the sentiments of your post, there is one major problem:
One of the biggest rallies ever done in the UK (total I believe around 2 million people) walked through the streets of London. We still ended up fighting in the Iraq War. Tony Blair decided that as "only" 2 million rallied, and the other 58 million "stayed home" it was a democratic decision, and that the 58 million were giving him permission to go to war.
Conclusion: Parliament doesn't give a shit about rallies.
Slashdot Mirror
Surely this is why the right to bear arms should only be part of a "well regulated militia".
And you think what the banks did wasn't fraud?
There are some Christian sects (?cults?) who can't donate or accept donated cells. From memory the (inaccurately named) Christian Scientists are one. I think (but I'm too tired right now to check) they can accept blood plasma because there's no cells in it.
It would be even better if Harper wasn't spending $35b CDN on fighter jets we don't need.
Companies are at their most profitable when they have a monopoly. So yes, it *is* capitalism 101.
Welcome to capitalism 101.
When the religious fruit cakes took over. No better than America
I think you're confusing them with the folks in Boston.
The Brits value tea far too much to be throwing it anywhere, except in a tea pot to make a brew!
I used Vermin cable internet for several years and had no problems at all.
While I generally don't agree with Americans over what the government's job is - I have to agree with this one. I'm sure there are better ways that the government can involved in dealing with the obesity problem.
Good luck getting any bank in America regulated if the Republicans all three branches.
They are difficult comparisons as in the UK the equivalent of president (the Prime Minister) sits in the Houses of Parliament. My comparison was derived from the fact that the House of Lords is the second house - much like the Senate. Just about there, the comparisons end.
No - MP == Member of Parliament
And more like a congress critter than a senator.
The House of Lords is more like the Senate.
You are aware that the Tories in the UK are most definitely not Liberal. Right? That would be like describing Rick Santorum as a Liberal and a socialist.
At which point the managers will be the first up against the wall? I'd be all for that!
This is why I always use Bittorrent to download Linux ISOs (and seed them afterwards). Often these organisations are not for profit or at least trying to make a small profit. Why would I put a small dent into their costs by using their bandwidth when I can use some of theirs and a lot of other peoples who (like me) are willing to share the pain? Fortunately I'm with a flat rate ISP, but I would still continue to seed even if I weren't.
Provided you can persuade the to wear pink shirts.
I know f all about UK vs British vs Scottish law so I could be wrong, but according to the obligatory wikipedia reference Scotland only got their Parliament in 1999. Surely both aforementioned acts would be part of the Scottish law, at least until Scotland decides to repeal them?
Welcome to human nature 101
Oh wait, I just described how the entire supposedly merit-based country is run.
FTFY
While I agree with the sentiments of your post, there is one major problem:
One of the biggest rallies ever done in the UK (total I believe around 2 million people) walked through the streets of London. We still ended up fighting in the Iraq War.
Tony Blair decided that as "only" 2 million rallied, and the other 58 million "stayed home" it was a democratic decision, and that the 58 million were giving him permission to go to war.
Conclusion: Parliament doesn't give a shit about rallies.
Not entirely true:
The British Bill of Rights
Seems to work for politicians.
How would you define it?
The law should be about protecting PEOPLE, not what's "easiest" for corporations.
FTFY