If anyone is familiar with the show in the US called "Myth Busters" they did this exact thing. They tried and tried to get the thing to explode to no avail...so they put it in a plexi-glass like container and filled it with a mix of gas fumes and oxygen and called the cell, STILL NO explosion. the only damn way THEY could get the thing to go off was to put an actual spark in the chamber with it.
There are *so* many things that can go wrong with cellphones that if I were to see one exploding I'd first ask "what was the condition of the phone prior to the explosion?" People are STUPID...I used to do tech support, I KNOW this:)
about 15 years or so ago is when I started noticing something was wrong. I've got an open diary and was called a "Trator"(sic) and told to move to a different country if I didn't like what was going on in America. People have become fractured here. Either you're a gun-toting expansionist or you're a hippie traitor...there seems to be no middle ground anymore. It scares me a lot.
Seriously, you take a risk walking outside everyday. Who knows, there's an infintesimal chance you could be hit by a stray meteor...
Yes, things come with warranties about being free from defects, but should we REALLY be THAT concerned about something with such a low failure rate? If that were the case, then just sign up for a padded room with a lock in it, it's pretty much the only place you'll be anywhere near safe...both from yourself and others. Of course...you might rip out the padding and try and eat it.....
-- I can't charge them for the time, and even if I could, it is petty and contributes to the general decline of society.--
Just an offshoot. I feel what contributes to the "decline of society" is when the corps. make something difficult on PURPOSE, raising the "return bar", as it were, to some point where just going and getting another product is *much* easier.
An example: I had a transmission replaced by a mechanic, it took him about 3 days longer than he told me, but eventually I got it back. 2 1/2 hours after getting my car back, I was stuck on the road...the transmission that he put in (b.t.w. it *WAS* a 'used / rebuilt' transmission.) gave out. I had my car towed BACK to him and asked that he repair my car and reimburse me for the tow. He refused to reimburse me but agreed to re-fix my car. This happened 4 different times. I had to threaten to sue him, THEN magically he got it right. I was STILL out my tow charges because honestly, I didn't have the $$ to sue the son-of-a-bitch for it.
--Well, it may seem harsh, but you could always move to another state, or not smoke marijuana. of course, it is addicting, so that's like telling people not to smoke.--
Or we could turn the point around and say that if you don't like SOMEONE ELSE smoking marijuana, you could just move to another state right?
--Laws ARE societies morals.-- Law : The body of rules and principles governing the affairs of a community and enforced by a political authority; a legal system: international law.
Moral : Of or concerned with the judgment of the goodness or badness of human action and character.
From their definitions, I'd say they were two completely different things. One is setup to guide a society, the other to guide a person. The problem I have with having "moralistic" laws is this : Who's morals do we get to use? Yours? Mine? Ted, the guy from Accounting's? I believe that in order for a law enforcement system to work, it has to be FAIR and EQUAL to 99% of people. Notice I said 99%, I don't think we'll ever have 100% of people happy, that doesn't bother me. When we're starting to get a large portion of our society IN JAIL for non-violent crimes, you're led to believe either that we're a society of lawbreakers and brigands, OR, that perhaps the laws are unjust and people are being deprived of "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" unnecessarily.
--For example: how old is a consenting adult for you? -- That, depends on the person. There is no "magic age" to me. My long time girlfriend was 17 when I met her, and I was 25. Does that make me a pervert? How about if you consider that she's one of the most mentally mature people I've met in my entire life?
The reason that I believe in such a simplistic code of LAW is to allow people the freedom to do what THEY feel is right as long as it DOES NOT infringe on another person's PROPERTY or PERSON. It's not a difficult concept to grasp really. You live your way, I'll live mine, as long as I don't steal from you or injure your person, we're fine. I don't have to believe the way you do, and you don't have to believe the way I do. I thought that was that whole "Freedom" thing we keep sending people to die for.
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, "Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye," when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." --A Famous Carpenter.
-- Here's an easy solution: Don't commit a crime and you won't go to jail.--
More and more things are *becoming* illegal. Everyone's heard of the "Don't eat ice cream on Sundays in town square" law, how many MORE of those are being passed?? Things that benefit only one group or segment of society? "Sorry, but you have to buy a PERMIT to do that, and we can't sell them on Sundays, it's the lords day... what do you mean you're not Christian?" No liquor on Sunday and other laws are directly out of the CHRISTIAN religon, yet they still are upheld in spite of seperation of church and state. Eventually, what might happen when NOT being Christian (or any other religon, color, sex, etc etc.) is actually ILLEGAL? Scoff if you will, but look at the laws passed lately, especially the PATRIOT Act...
IMHO, law should be alot simpler : consenting adults should not be put in jail unless they physically harm the person or property of a nonconsenting other. Morality *should not* be legislated in a Free Country. Your easy solution isn't so easy unless you generally go along with everyone else in everything.
"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian Religon." -George Washington, Treaty of Tripoli, 1796
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, "Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye," when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." -Someone who hung for peace.
-- Liberals consistently pursue a policy of appeasement, thinking idealistically that peace begets peace.--
Because Bush's policy of "Let's be *EVERYONE'S* big brother has helped world opinion of the US SOOO much! Clue-bat: For the first time since it's creation, the US has been THROWN OFF the human rights committee in the UN. **FOR RIGHTS VIOLATIONS**, we've been on that committee since it was *created.* That, along with refusal to budge on the Kyoto accord, the tax cut for the rich, the lies and the misdirection are why I'm voting for the ABB party (Anyone But Bush). Better the Devil I don't know than the Devil I do in this case.
Would now be a good time to mention that we need MORE poltical parties in this system? Two of them simply doesn't cut it anymore. Hey, I'll vote Democrat...wait they pretty much do the same thing the Republicans do...and vice-versa.
--I just found it silly that several posters were putting them up on a plinth as some example of higher conciousness. It's just smut!!--
One man's 'smut' is another's artwork, and vice versa. A lot of the posts here seem to try to home in on the fact that "I don't find it correct and healthy for ME, therefore...it must not be correct and healthy for ANYONE." bent...and that just irritates me. For me, the questions are this:
1.) Are they doing this because they enjoy it? If yes, than go for it!
2.) Are they being coerced in any way to post these pictures? No? Then frankly who cares what they do with their time??
As far as I can tell *puts on Flame-retartand suit* most Christians believe the body to be innately sinful, and therefore, any depiction of it is automatically wrong, unless it's for the bible. They're told that this body was created by sin in the first place, and that it's practically a sin to be born...and we're SUPPOSED to be ashamed of our bodies anyway, reference Adam and Eve story.
To my point though: It's difficult for someone to see something as art when it has been engendered in them that what they're looking at is a "Bad Thing". I referenced Christianity because it's the major religon in the US, and therefore affects society the most. A lot of the tastefully done nudes I've seen I would whole-heartedly consider art. I find that the line is mostly intent. Personally I don't even like surfing for porn anymore because it's always "bitches ho's and sluts!". The entire industry has no class as far as I'm concerned. They *do* degrade women and treat them as objects...which I see as wrong and also as engendering that type of behaviour pattern in those who enjoy viewing it...or perhaps bringing out an existing pattern. So, in answer to your question, I'd have to say that, for me at least, intent and style are where I draw the line. YMMV.
--When routine upgrades break things, they are going to label it a piece of shit and never use it again.--
You sir MUST be new to computers. Mosey over to microsoft.com and see just how many fixes there are for their pos SP's that BREAK ALL KINDS OF SHIT. Oh, and last I checked....lots of people have labeled Windows a "Piece of shit" and they use it all the time.
I for one will be trying hard to IGNORE the fact that it's 9/11 *AGAIN*. FYI, no I'm not a terrorist, yes I have a heart... but for GOD'S SAKE...it's been years...and if we really wanted to mourn we should also mourn for the thousands of innocent Iraqi's that have been killed because of W.
The Bin Laden Family - One of the first multi-million dollar investors in the Group.
Now...what does the Carlyle group do you ask? Investments. Mostly in Defense Contractors, Energy and Power companies, and Telecom and media companies.
My question is this: Do you honestly think that a man who wanted to open up Parks in Alaska for oil drilling, or a man who has done more to relax the EPA's standards for pollution (allowing things like Kodak http://www.kodakstoxiccolors.com/ to continue unabated.) really cares about his fellow man or the enviroment? Look at what the guy has done!
When you ask me, did he lie? Well, honestly I can't prove that he did. But I can surmise from his actions and attitudes that there is a *very* high possibility that he would lie for profit.
--But did the President say something he knew was untrue? In other words, did he lie? No.--
I honestly believe that there is more going on in this situation than "did he lie?" A lot of people stand to make a *LOT* of money from this war...
We've been de-stabilizing countries for decades now.(Check out The Project for the New American Century : http://www.newamericancentury.org/) We've been trying to build pipelines in the middle east region for years as well. As I type this, (and I'll have to get the list...) the US has troops affecting the governments of something like 50+ countries all over the planet. Remember the Taliban? *WE* helped get them into power. Saddam Hussain? *WE* gave him the guns and ammo, and also THE EQUIPMENT to MAKE the chemical weapons that he used.
Fact : One company that stands to profit from the war in Iraq is the Carlyle Group. Colon Powell has worked for them. Don Rumsfeld has worked for them as well as: George Bush Sr. - as senior advisior Frank Carlucci -Carlyle Chairman Emeritus
Former Secretary of Defense
and Deputy Director of the CIA. James Baker -Carlyle Senior Counselor
Former Sec. of State and Sec. of
the Treasury. John Major -Former Prime Minister of England. (continued)
Terrorist : adj : characteristic of someone who employs terrorism (especially as a political weapon); "terrorist activity"; "terrorist state" n : a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities.
So let me get this straight. Someone who employs terror as a political weapon. So...trumping up a threat that you helped create and nuture so as to remain in control of a situation and benefit your friends and supporters...would that person be considered a terrorist?
Or, we could go another way... would someone who uses the famed "Weapons of Mass Destruction" be labeled a terrorist? "BRITISH and American coalition forces are using depleted uranium (DU) shells in the war against Iraq and deliberately flouting a United Nations resolution which classifies the munitions as illegal weapons of mass destruction." http://www.sundayherald.com/32522 Here also are some more articles on DU shells: http://www.miltoxproj.org/DU/science.html
All in all and my point being, The United States has been, and is currently engaging in "terrorist" activities even according to it's OWN STANDARDS (i.e. the use of WMD's.) The 'Extremists' that I fear most are in the Gov't, and on the T.V's.
--If doing WHATEVER wants to do, then RAPE and other bad things would also come under FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!!. Freedom cannot be not unlimited FREEDOM.For our own good and that of others . --
Someone once said - "The RIGHT for you to swing your fist stops at my nose."
...I always get the same image... The President standing up on a podium saying "Yes, these *BAD* people were trying to take away your rights! SHAME on them. In order to prevent them from doing that again, we're going to take away your rights...but we're doing it to protect them."
--Shock and Awe worked for me : I'm in shock he did it, and in awe that he got away with it.
As a side note what liberties our fore-fathers faught and died for that you willingly trade in for a bit of percieved 'safety', you dont desrve to have in the first place..
Benjamin Franklin said it as well : "Those who would sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve *NEITHER*"
There's a lot of money to be made in gambling and porn, so why not allow those customers, or complete the needed regulatory thingimagigs to allow them to act as a payment system for those industries.
A few reasons: (1.) Regulating something has the habit of making most people think that the Gov't is approving of said action. (2.) It's another example of the Gov't trying to tell you what you can and cannot do with *your* money. (albeit in a round-about way.)
Slashdot Mirror
If anyone is familiar with the show in the US called "Myth Busters" they did this exact thing. They tried and tried to get the thing to explode to no avail...so they put it in a plexi-glass like container and filled it with a mix of gas fumes and oxygen and called the cell, STILL NO explosion. the only damn way THEY could get the thing to go off was to put an actual spark in the chamber with it.
:)
There are *so* many things that can go wrong with cellphones that if I were to see one exploding I'd first ask "what was the condition of the phone prior to the explosion?" People are STUPID...I used to do tech support, I KNOW this
Asmodeus
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:B7hYQ0Ipn1sJ: www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/special_packages/ir aq/6918170.htm+fox+news+wmd+weapons+of+mass+destru ction+study&hl=en&client=firefox-a/
Weapons of Mass Destruction. That was the first thing that came to mind...I'm sure that with more time and want...I could find more...but there's a start for you.
Asmodeus
about 15 years or so ago is when I started noticing something was wrong. I've got an open diary and was called a "Trator"(sic) and told to move to a different country if I didn't like what was going on in America. People have become fractured here. Either you're a gun-toting expansionist or you're a hippie traitor...there seems to be no middle ground anymore. It scares me a lot.
(Yes, those were generalizations...deal with it.)
Seriously, you take a risk walking outside everyday. Who knows, there's an infintesimal chance you could be hit by a stray meteor...
Yes, things come with warranties about being free from defects, but should we REALLY be THAT concerned about something with such a low failure rate? If that were the case, then just sign up for a padded room with a lock in it, it's pretty much the only place you'll be anywhere near safe...both from yourself and others. Of course...you might rip out the padding and try and eat it.....
-- I can't charge them for the time, and even if I could, it is petty and contributes to the general decline of society.--
:
Just an offshoot.
I feel what contributes to the "decline of society" is when the corps. make something difficult on PURPOSE, raising the "return bar", as it were, to some point where just going and getting another product is *much* easier.
An example
I had a transmission replaced by a mechanic, it took him about 3 days longer than he told me, but eventually I got it back. 2 1/2 hours after getting my car back, I was stuck on the road...the transmission that he put in (b.t.w. it *WAS* a 'used / rebuilt' transmission.) gave out. I had my car towed BACK to him and asked that he repair my car and reimburse me for the tow. He refused to reimburse me but agreed to re-fix my car. This happened 4 different times. I had to threaten to sue him, THEN magically he got it right.
I was STILL out my tow charges because honestly, I didn't have the $$ to sue the son-of-a-bitch for it.
--All praise our new alcohol based legal system.--
I, for one, welcome our alcohol-swilling justicars!
--Well, it may seem harsh, but you could always move to another state, or not smoke marijuana. of course, it is addicting, so that's like telling people not to smoke.--
Or we could turn the point around and say that if you don't like SOMEONE ELSE smoking marijuana, you could just move to another state right?
More to the point, "Marijuana produces no withdrawal symptoms no matter how heavy it is used. It is habit forming (psychologically addictive), but not physically addictive. The majority of people who quit marijuana don't even have to think twice about it. Comparing marijuana to addictive drugs is really quite silly.
For a drug to be physically addictive, it must be reinforcing, produce withdrawal symptoms, and produce tolerance. Marijuana is reinforcing, because it feels good, but it does not do the other two things. Caffeine, nicotine and alcohol are all physically addictive."(1)
--Laws ARE societies morals.--
Law : The body of rules and principles governing the affairs of a community and enforced by a political authority; a legal system: international law.
Moral : Of or concerned with the judgment of the goodness or badness of human action and character.
From their definitions, I'd say they were two completely different things. One is setup to guide a society, the other to guide a person. The problem I have with having "moralistic" laws is this : Who's morals do we get to use? Yours? Mine? Ted, the guy from Accounting's? I believe that in order for a law enforcement system to work, it has to be FAIR and EQUAL to 99% of people. Notice I said 99%, I don't think we'll ever have 100% of people happy, that doesn't bother me. When we're starting to get a large portion of our society IN JAIL for non-violent crimes, you're led to believe either that we're a society of lawbreakers and brigands, OR, that perhaps the laws are unjust and people are being deprived of "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" unnecessarily.
--For example: how old is a consenting adult for you? --
That, depends on the person. There is no "magic age" to me. My long time girlfriend was 17 when I met her, and I was 25. Does that make me a pervert? How about if you consider that she's one of the most mentally mature people I've met in my entire life?
The reason that I believe in such a simplistic code of LAW is to allow people the freedom to do what THEY feel is right as long as it DOES NOT infringe on another person's PROPERTY or PERSON. It's not a difficult concept to grasp really. You live your way, I'll live mine, as long as I don't steal from you or injure your person, we're fine. I don't have to believe the way you do, and you don't have to believe the way I do. I thought that was that whole "Freedom" thing we keep sending people to die for.
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, "Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye," when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."
--A Famous Carpenter.
(1)
What Marijuana actually does and some information that's NOT from a pharm. company trying to sell you drugs.
-- Here's an easy solution: Don't commit a crime and you won't go to jail.--
More and more things are *becoming* illegal. Everyone's heard of the "Don't eat ice cream on Sundays in town square" law, how many MORE of those are being passed?? Things that benefit only one group or segment of society? "Sorry, but you have to buy a PERMIT to do that, and we can't sell them on Sundays, it's the lords day... what do you mean you're not Christian?" No liquor on Sunday and other laws are directly out of the CHRISTIAN religon, yet they still are upheld in spite of seperation of church and state. Eventually, what might happen when NOT being Christian (or any other religon, color, sex, etc etc.) is actually ILLEGAL? Scoff if you will, but look at the laws passed lately, especially the PATRIOT Act...
IMHO, law should be alot simpler : consenting adults should not be put in jail unless they physically harm the person or property of a nonconsenting other. Morality *should not* be legislated in a Free Country.
Your easy solution isn't so easy unless you generally go along with everyone else in everything.
"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian Religon."
-George Washington, Treaty of Tripoli, 1796
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, "Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye," when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."
-Someone who hung for peace.
-- Liberals consistently pursue a policy of appeasement, thinking idealistically that peace begets peace.--
:
Because Bush's policy of "Let's be *EVERYONE'S* big brother has helped world opinion of the US SOOO much!
Clue-bat
For the first time since it's creation, the US has been THROWN OFF the human rights committee in the UN. **FOR RIGHTS VIOLATIONS**, we've been on that committee since it was *created.* That, along with refusal to budge on the Kyoto accord, the tax cut for the rich, the lies and the misdirection are why I'm voting for the ABB party (Anyone But Bush).
Better the Devil I don't know than the Devil I do in this case.
Would now be a good time to mention that we need MORE poltical parties in this system? Two of them simply doesn't cut it anymore. Hey, I'll vote Democrat...wait they pretty much do the same thing the Republicans do...and vice-versa.
My 2 cents, nothing more and nothing less.
A.A.
News Flash!
This just in, HE IS SPEAKING ENGLISH...just not AMERICAN. There *is* a difference ya know.
Thanks!
A.A
--I just found it silly that several posters were putting them up on a plinth as some example of higher conciousness. It's just smut!!--
One man's 'smut' is another's artwork, and vice versa. A lot of the posts here seem to try to home in on the fact that "I don't find it correct and healthy for ME, therefore...it must not be correct and healthy for ANYONE." bent...and that just irritates me.
For me, the questions are this:
1.) Are they doing this because they enjoy it?
If yes, than go for it!
2.) Are they being coerced in any way to post these pictures?
No? Then frankly who cares what they do with their time??
Thanks!
A.A
As far as I can tell *puts on Flame-retartand suit* most Christians believe the body to be innately sinful, and therefore, any depiction of it is automatically wrong, unless it's for the bible. They're told that this body was created by sin in the first place, and that it's practically a sin to be born...and we're SUPPOSED to be ashamed of our bodies anyway, reference Adam and Eve story.
To my point though:
It's difficult for someone to see something as art when it has been engendered in them that what they're looking at is a "Bad Thing". I referenced Christianity because it's the major religon in the US, and therefore affects society the most. A lot of the tastefully done nudes I've seen I would whole-heartedly consider art. I find that the line is mostly intent. Personally I don't even like surfing for porn anymore because it's always "bitches ho's and sluts!". The entire industry has no class as far as I'm concerned. They *do* degrade women and treat them as objects...which I see as wrong and also as engendering that type of behaviour pattern in those who enjoy viewing it...or perhaps bringing out an existing pattern. So, in answer to your question, I'd have to say that, for me at least, intent and style are where I draw the line. YMMV.
A.A
*blinks* Ya know.......*goes back to bed* I must not have eaten my Wheaties this morning...*grumbles*
Good point.....comment withdrawn....I will now go back to feeling really dumb...
A.A
--When routine upgrades break things, they are going to label it a piece of shit and never use it again.--
You sir MUST be new to computers. Mosey over to microsoft.com and see just how many fixes there are for their pos SP's that BREAK ALL KINDS OF SHIT. Oh, and last I checked....lots of people have labeled Windows a "Piece of shit" and they use it all the time.
I for one will be trying hard to IGNORE the fact that it's 9/11 *AGAIN*. FYI, no I'm not a terrorist, yes I have a heart... but for GOD'S SAKE...it's been years...and if we really wanted to mourn we should also mourn for the thousands of innocent Iraqi's that have been killed because of W.
A.A
(continued)
:
The Bin Laden Family - One of the first multi-million dollar investors in the Group.
Now...what does the Carlyle group do you ask? Investments. Mostly in Defense Contractors, Energy and Power companies, and Telecom and media companies.
My question is this
Do you honestly think that a man who wanted to open up Parks in Alaska for oil drilling, or a man who has done more to relax the EPA's standards for pollution (allowing things like Kodak http://www.kodakstoxiccolors.com/ to continue unabated.) really cares about his fellow man or the enviroment? Look at what the guy has done!
When you ask me, did he lie? Well, honestly I can't prove that he did. But I can surmise from his actions and attitudes that there is a *very* high possibility that he would lie for profit.
Asmodeus
Azazel
Mictian
--But did the President say something he knew was untrue? In other words, did he lie? No.--
:
I honestly believe that there is more going on in this situation than "did he lie?" A lot of people stand to make a *LOT* of money from this war...
We've been de-stabilizing countries for decades now.(Check out The Project for the New American Century : http://www.newamericancentury.org/) We've been trying to build pipelines in the middle east region for years as well. As I type this, (and I'll have to get the list...) the US has troops affecting the governments of something like 50+ countries all over the planet. Remember the Taliban? *WE* helped get them into power. Saddam Hussain? *WE* gave him the guns and ammo, and also THE EQUIPMENT to MAKE the chemical weapons that he used.
Fact : One company that stands to profit from the war in Iraq is the Carlyle Group. Colon Powell has worked for them. Don Rumsfeld has worked for them as well as
George Bush Sr. - as senior advisior
Frank Carlucci -Carlyle Chairman Emeritus
Former Secretary of Defense
and Deputy Director of the CIA.
James Baker -Carlyle Senior Counselor
Former Sec. of State and Sec. of
the Treasury.
John Major -Former Prime Minister of England.
(continued)
--At least Bush had support for the invasion. --
Bush *lied* to get that support...ergo he did *NOT* have the support in the first place. Sorry...I had to jump on it *hangs head*
Terrorist : adj : characteristic of someone who employs terrorism (especially as a political weapon); "terrorist activity"; "terrorist state" n : a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities.
So let me get this straight. Someone who employs terror as a political weapon. So...trumping up a threat that you helped create and nuture so as to remain in control of a situation and benefit your friends and supporters...would that person be considered a terrorist?
Or, we could go another way... would someone who uses the famed "Weapons of Mass Destruction" be labeled a terrorist?
"BRITISH and American coalition forces are using depleted uranium (DU) shells in the war against Iraq and deliberately flouting a United Nations resolution which classifies the munitions as illegal weapons of mass destruction." http://www.sundayherald.com/32522
Here also are some more articles on DU shells:
http://www.miltoxproj.org/DU/science.html
All in all and my point being, The United States has been, and is currently engaging in "terrorist" activities even according to it's OWN STANDARDS (i.e. the use of WMD's.) The 'Extremists' that I fear most are in the Gov't, and on the T.V's.
I'm copying that...that's gotta be one of the funniest things I've read in weeks! Thx for the laugh man!
--If doing WHATEVER wants to do, then RAPE and other bad things would also come under FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!!.
Freedom cannot be not unlimited FREEDOM.For our own good and that of others . --
Someone once said - "The RIGHT for you to swing your fist stops at my nose."
...I always get the same image... The President standing up on a podium saying "Yes, these *BAD* people were trying to take away your rights! SHAME on them. In order to prevent them from doing that again, we're going to take away your rights...but we're doing it to protect them."
--Shock and Awe worked for me : I'm in shock he did it, and in awe that he got away with it.
A very good book on the subject of consensual crimes laws in the US is the following : http://www.mcwilliams.com/books/books/aint/
As a side note what liberties our fore-fathers faught and died for that you willingly trade in for a bit of percieved 'safety', you dont desrve to have in the first place..
Benjamin Franklin said it as well : "Those who would sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve *NEITHER*"
There's a lot of money to be made in gambling and porn, so why not allow those customers, or complete the needed regulatory thingimagigs to allow them to act as a payment system for those industries.
A few reasons:
(1.) Regulating something has the habit of making most people think that the Gov't is approving of said action.
(2.) It's another example of the Gov't trying to tell you what you can and cannot do with *your* money. (albeit in a round-about way.)
http://www.mcwilliams.com/books/books/aint/ A very good read on the consensual crime laws in the US.