Lets look at it logically. A personal belief would be deciding upon the issue of marriage as it relates to your religion as is defined by your religion, that is a personal manner. When you take it to an act of administrative law you are logically shifting it from a personal religion to attempting to subvert the constitution and force you religious beliefs upon others under the guise of law.

Take for example a personal opinion of mine, I am opposed to divorce, not meaning to say people should be forced to live together under law nor that they should be banned for following their own individuals paths or be be banned from having relationship with others. Just quite simply they have made a life vow and they should be bound to that life vow and simply legally not be allowed to cancel that one and start off another one (logically realistically pointless, the life vow, their word is meaningless and just a maybe). So more of a technicality of law than a religious belief. Want to make a life vow but want exclusion to enable breaking, then bloody include them in the vow, others don't take the vow in you have no intention of committing to it. So personally don't want to be stuck in that marriage simply walk away from, publicly declare yourself not a part of it, fine. Legally, well, you have had your shot at a life vow and failed, suck it up, you can not make another, so think a damn sight more carefully about that first one before you make it.

Sorry but law equally applied is letter of the law, newsworthy is only an opinion. So how far does it stretch, elected official, president, governor, mayor, city manage how about all government employees, work for the government and loose your rights. How about contractors and their employees, contracted by the government and you work for the government. Easy you think, then how about teachers and policemen which side of newsworthy are they. More realistically how about just you and yours are protected and everyone else is newsworthy.

Sorry you are just full of shite. .... ..... ..... news at 11 fit for purpose laws in the UK the term you were so clearly desperately trying to avoid ( as it is specifically illegally excluded in M$ EULAs http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/.... So regardless of your deceit, regardless of a company claiming to exclude fit for purpose, in the UK consumer laws categorically state that products must be fit for purpose. And by no stretch of the imagination can anyone claim that a software product, oh my, wear the fuck out ;D.

Ideally, as it would be free open source software by law, any company that chooses to could competitively support it.

Especially seeing as a government can and reasonable do so, demand that if a software companying refuses to support software already purchases it should by law be required to open up the source of that software so that it can be supported by others or warrant that the support is now finally free of all bugs and security flaws.

See you just dont get it, it is not about whether it is worse or better than at any particular time in history it is all about how accesible those targets are now. Before, well, you had to go through the whole base and the expanded and finally worn down defence force to get to them, now, well not so much so. Applying modern technology and more open borders, well, basically they can reach out and touch pretty much anyone, no matter how rich or powerful. Personally targeted weapon system from extended ranges are now practicable regardless of protection attempted, so that is the difference. Being the puppet masters in the background safe from retaliation is simply no longer possible, that is the change and that will reflect changes in tactics.

Your forget that the law is equally applied, can't protect the gullible and 'not so innocent' without protecting the politician. So are politicians entitled to hide the sexual peccadillos whilst publicly attacking others or not, chose one in all in, the law is the law. If you think politicians give a crap about the gullible 'not so innocent' you well are totally gullible and very likely 'not so innocent'.

There is a way, quite simple really. You buy a big screen dumb display and attach a Linux PC. Of course big screen displays with a whole lot less technology than a smart TV are some how more expensive than a smart TV, perhaps because they are trying to keep out an open market. The Linux PC of course will do everything you need it to do, flexibility of course creates a catch 22 , the more it can do the more complex the controls become. Of course do anything at all like adding a camera and voice capability and you really do want a PC to make sure security can be implemented properly and kept updated.

The "Smart TV" needs to shift from idiot box ideology to being a "Family Personal Computer" with enhanced security features. The Samsung model with a separate box just needs to be expanded upon, straight display with a, expandable media PC, sold as a package. Likely Dell could try making a push in this area.

You are attempting to claim the freedom to control others in actions that do not phsyically affect you but purely are the disruption of the false morality of behaving privately in a manner you claim publicly not to participate. Whose problem is it really when your private morality does not match the public reality that you claim, especially when very likely you attack others for having a public morality that matches you private morality.

Seriously think about this folks, should a family politician that claims homosexuals be fined and imprisoned or in any other way prejudiced against be allowed protection under law when caught photographically 'in flagrante delicto' with some of the same sex or should that image be legally published and that politician publicly ridiculed, how many regular two faced folks need to bear the adult responsibilities for their actions to ensure politicians and others are held to account. How many of those who cry foul the loudest ran around ridiculing others in similar situations just as loudly.

When corporations ie the military industrial complex engage in initiating wars the they extend that battlefield to the boardroom, especially when they engage countries that are capable of targeted them directly. They do most definitely do deserve it, so nothing science fiction about but something decidedly very moral about it. Once personally targeted the chicken hawks that they and the puppet politicians are, will sue for peace not that they can be trusted of course but they can always be readily targeted again.

They are in fact a fully fascist totalitarian government. With the majority of senior government officials involved in private for profit business operations. They fully use their positions of power within government to give their private for profit businesses competitive advantage. Major example being prior to privatising the government steel manufacturing business, the government bought and stockpiled steel, driving up it's price and hence increase the public price of the steel manufacturing business, prior to selling it. Those empty cities, care needs to be taken if foreign investment seeks to spend on major constructions developments, as the government is likely to use it's power to keep developments empty, force investors in bankruptcy and seize the developments and then make the available at a discount to select local populations.

Right now the government of China is knowingly manipulating the corruptibility of capitalism to economically target foreign business and in turn foreign countries. They are now pushing into arms exports, providing low cost arms and munitions to those countries opposing competitors to China's growing power and influence (especially into trading arms for primary resources). The fascist government of China directly competes with existing major multinational corporations and is seeking to displace them with major Chinese corporations, this to tackle the puppet governments of those multinational corporations (weaken the puppet masters in order to weaken their control).

As China has slipped from communist to capitalist so the rest of us have slipped into the espionage stage of the Corporate Wars, where non-puppet governments are now waging an espionage war against the puppet governments of multi-national corporations the chief puppet of course being The United State of America. An interesting side note many of structures of law enforcement and regulation are starting to resist their blatant corporate control and the puppet status of their government the political appointees running their agencies in a corrupt corporate biased manner. This espionage war includes the funding and establishing of 'rebel' elements attacking governments that are not controlled by multi-national corporations, these rebel elements are engaged into anything from protests through to riots through to all out civil war. The next increase will be the targeting the executives and boardrooms of those promoting the corporate wars. Pointless fighting the puppets and their government agencies, much smarter to target the more accessible, less defensible, less numerous and difficult to replace.

The comparative territory being? Perhaps the US could give California back to Mexico and then peaceful invade and take it back. Reality here it is all lame arsed pressure bullshit. The US is trying to force an early agreement because Ukrainians are pretty aggressive and are not really going to just bend over and take austerity whilst the country is sold out from underneath them. So they want to lock Russia into an agreement a get them to help force austerity on the Ukrainians. For Russia of course the longer this all takes, the more pissed off with austerity the Ukranians will become, and regardless of, oh look new laws hardly surprising in the switch from left to right, major protests are now a crime against the state, riots are now treason, now that wont stick.

Basically the US now has zero reliability and as such there are no negotiating, sure there is a bunch of empty talk but any agreements with the US are basically meaningless. All there is for Russia to do is to decide how to stick it to the US corporations driving this current crazy adventure, whilst they allow it to drag on without an agreement and let it all collapse under it's own weight. For the US they are stuck, the more they open their mouth, the more sanctions they try, the more difficult an agreement becomes which is against their own goals, confusion reigns supreme.

The US is pretty much being bogged down in will it generate a profit even to the point of escalating costs because of course your costs are some else's profits, really self destructive stuff.

Knowledge is choice, without knowledge there is no choice. You can not choose to ignore knowledge, you are only in ignorance embracing ignorance. However DNA knowledge should be very tightly restricted with severe penalties including imprisonment, otherwise you will be 'opening up' people to organ donor bounties.

Well, 1.24 million people did not die bumping into each other when walking in 2010 but they did die in motor vehicle accidents. So yeah, restructuring the design of human cities as well as other elements of society to reduce the use of motor vehicles is very likely a bloody good idea to save people's lives. With over a million people a year getting killed by them they most certainly don't seem such a good idea in the current implementation at all, the mind boggles at the idea that tens of millions are injured by motor vehicles each and every year and the reality is you are just playing Russian roulette when ever you climb into one and one could not consider any other product surviving with that annual death and injury toll. PS yes scissors certainly seem a whole lot safer than cars, so just exactly what was your point, have you considered perhaps, that you might have a running with scissors phobia ;D.