This is so way offtopic, but I'm going to have to bite.
Negative. You can research all you want and create as many new stem cell lines as you want. You just don't get government funding for it. Government funding is granted for the handful of stem cell lines, which is actually an improvement over what it was if you have no qualms with arbitrary definitions of human life. Why does Germany have a similar law? Because it is run by a bunch of radical Chrisitans, or because it has to deal with the specters of the likes of Mengele in its past?
It's all in the reasons. Whilst the Germans possibly formulated their bioethics arguments properly, the US ban on stem cell research was a religious fundie gut reaction aimed at winning brownie points with Bush's religious nutter support base. All of the most vocal arguments put forward against stem cell research have been basically of the same type as those coming from the anti-abortion camp. Only now, after substantial protest and significant wastage of researchers' time, the restrictions have been relaxed.
Which is why we're remaking both Afgahnistan and Iraq into Chrisitian nations by having them declare Islam the official religion... right...
Again, consider intent here. Bush is fixated on the Crusade mentality. While the main reason was most likely oil, a significant and unstated part of the Bush administration's reasoning was to shift the power balance in the Middle East, and that is something the Church has been wanting to do for quite a while.
Any attempt by government to enforce a seperation [sic] of church and state is itself a violation of the seperation of church and state. Removing legislation that does discriminates based on religion actually means FEWER laws that respect the establishment of religion.
That's complete rubbish and incomrehensible to boot. The Church and other religious (and quasi-religious) organisations tend to grow in power over time, and naturally as they grow bigger, the potential for interference with government affairs and the promotion of religious ideas and mores tends to grow. Active effort is actually required to enforce this separation, otherwise corruption of one by the other is inevitable. There are plenty of examples in history of this.
Danster: Issue government-sanctioned religious propaganda? CS: When? Example? There's plenty. Off the top of my head: Public pro-abstinence statements, arguing against contraception. Support, funding and promotion of "faith-based initiatives", etc, etc, etc.
... And finally, pushing through legislation that is designed to remove traditional liberties under the guise of terrorism countermeasures is directly designed to strengthen the position and power of the government. This has nothing to do with Christianity per se, but everything to do with strengthening the regime's power base. To reiterate, I am not attacking Christianity here, but rather the unwarranted expansion of the legislative powers of the Christian fundamentalist camp.
While undoubtedly not quite an uber-dictator yet, Bush has managed to do more than enough to solidify the right's position and to enforce the christian fundie agenda.
Freeze legitimate scientific research because of fuzzy religious bullshit? Check.
Invade another country on bogus grounds masking the real quasi-religious intent? Check.
Spend taxpayer money on blurring the line between church and state? Check.
Issue government-sanctioned religious propaganda? Check.
Erode traditional liberties through vaguely-worded and extremely broad legislation rushed through Congress on the back of the terrorist hysteria? Check.
And there's plenty more to come. It's only a matter of time.
America isn't a christian nation. There are indeed religious nutbags who desperately wish it were a christian nation, but so we've managed to keep those nutbags from seizing the government.
If it ever becomes a christian nation, I'll be one of the first to pick up a rifle and join the rebellion against the theocracy.
Time to pick up that rifle then. *Cough* Bush *Cough*.
The platform SDK which includes the command line compiler, linker and debugger has allways been a free download (hasn't it). Also, the.net SDK which includes all the languages, libraries, and compilers has also allways been a free download, this is what sharp develop uses.
Not quite.
The Platform SDK ships the 12.00.880 version of the VC++ compiler, which roughly corresponds to the 2002 version of Visual Studio.NET.
This release is the 13.10.3077 version which corresponds to the current version of the environment -- Visual Studio.NET 2003.
Slashdot Mirror
Negative. You can research all you want and create as many new stem cell lines as you want. You just don't get government funding for it. Government funding is granted for the handful of stem cell lines, which is actually an improvement over what it was if you have no qualms with arbitrary definitions of human life. Why does Germany have a similar law? Because it is run by a bunch of radical Chrisitans, or because it has to deal with the specters of the likes of Mengele in its past?
It's all in the reasons. Whilst the Germans possibly formulated their bioethics arguments properly, the US ban on stem cell research was a religious fundie gut reaction aimed at winning brownie points with Bush's religious nutter support base. All of the most vocal arguments put forward against stem cell research have been basically of the same type as those coming from the anti-abortion camp. Only now, after substantial protest and significant wastage of researchers' time, the restrictions have been relaxed.
Which is why we're remaking both Afgahnistan and Iraq into Chrisitian nations by having them declare Islam the official religion... right...
Again, consider intent here. Bush is fixated on the Crusade mentality. While the main reason was most likely oil, a significant and unstated part of the Bush administration's reasoning was to shift the power balance in the Middle East, and that is something the Church has been wanting to do for quite a while.
Any attempt by government to enforce a seperation [sic] of church and state is itself a violation of the seperation of church and state. Removing legislation that does discriminates based on religion actually means FEWER laws that respect the establishment of religion.
That's complete rubbish and incomrehensible to boot. The Church and other religious (and quasi-religious) organisations tend to grow in power over time, and naturally as they grow bigger, the potential for interference with government affairs and the promotion of religious ideas and mores tends to grow. Active effort is actually required to enforce this separation, otherwise corruption of one by the other is inevitable. There are plenty of examples in history of this.
Danster: Issue government-sanctioned religious propaganda?
CS: When? Example?
There's plenty. Off the top of my head: Public pro-abstinence statements, arguing against contraception. Support, funding and promotion of "faith-based initiatives", etc, etc, etc.
And there's plenty more to come. It's only a matter of time.
America isn't a christian nation. There are indeed religious nutbags who desperately wish it were a christian nation, but so we've managed to keep those nutbags from seizing the government. If it ever becomes a christian nation, I'll be one of the first to pick up a rifle and join the rebellion against the theocracy.
Time to pick up that rifle then. *Cough* Bush *Cough*.
(Sorry, replying to myself -- bad form, I know.)
.NET 2002 -- fooling me into thinking it was part of the PSDK.)
Actually, I goofed: the PSDK does not, in fact, ship with a C++ compiler. Both the parent and grandparent are wrong in varying ways.
(Setting the PSDK environment picked up the compiler executable from Visual Studio
The platform SDK which includes the command line compiler, linker and debugger has allways been a free download (hasn't it). Also, the .net SDK which includes all the languages, libraries, and compilers has also allways been a free download, this is what sharp develop uses.
.NET.
.NET 2003.
Not quite.
The Platform SDK ships the 12.00.880 version of the VC++ compiler, which roughly corresponds to the 2002 version of Visual Studio
This release is the 13.10.3077 version which corresponds to the current version of the environment -- Visual Studio
So no, not quite the same thing.