I don't believe "he was convicted of and illegally broad search", as I don't believe that any such charge was ever filed in that court.

Please note, this doesn't mean I believe that he shouldn't be charged and tried for such an offense (though I'm not sure what the charge would be, precisely). Merely that he has not, as of yet, been so convicted. And "improper use of military equipement" should be an additional charge filed at the same time, as it was comitted as a part of the same offense.

Caution: IANAL. These are just my opinions. Adopt them if you wish.

That, definitely. I'm not really sure he's "scum", but he's certaily demonstrated that he doesn't undertstand the law well enough to be trusted with enforcing it.

Well, ozone is fatal to most cells, so I suppose that if you exposed cancerous cells to it, it would kill them. Hydrogen peroxide is easier, though, and just as deadly. Hell, even pure O2 is pretty deadly.

Most embryos die within the first few days. Nobody notices, but I expect that it cleans out the "mitosis-invariant ageing".

> Too many kids show up with nothing, or nothing of any nutritional value, because the parent can't or won't prepare a lunch..

In a school district like that, there's so many kids on the dole that they are all getting a free lunch anyways. It's easier on the school district that way.

> My point is, if atheism is a valid belief/religion, then stealing should be an ethically (but not legally) okay profession. That is, atheism supports the path of the sociopath.

This is the problem with Xianity in particular. It believes that all people are fundementally evil (original sin) and that people need religion and the promise of severe retribution as a crutch. It doesn't allow for the possibility that people could develop or mature morally.

It's kind of "anti-StarTrek" if you think about it.

Plus you have the modern fundie movement that thinks that you have to be a blithering mindless moron vulnerable to the next cult leader to come down the line.

This is VERY "anti-StarTrek" if you think about it.

Europe has had 2000 years of that kind of indoctrination. It's a wonder the entire continent isn't a backwards idiot ridden Sodom and Gamorrah.

> A religious person says: I believe in God.
>
> An atheist says: You shouldn't because you can't prove it

No. You're projecting. You're trying to conflate what YOU would do with what some "other" would do. You are engaging in a common fundie tactic of pretending your own fault is that of your "enemy".

You assume that atheists "give a fuck". They generally don't. They really only have an interest when some theocrat jackass wants to impose their beliefs on everyone around them.

> What about non-religious people forcing their views onto you or other people?

This only manifests in preventing theocrats from running around like members of ISIS forcing their views on everyone else. We have certain laws and founding ideals that are contrary to the theocrat mentality.

> really? to me it seems more that the athiests are trying to prove something to the others on how superior they are.

In truth, it is Tea Baggers that do most of that. They are the most numerous and most visible of any of this kind of thing. They insist on pushing their beliefs on everyone (including other Xians).

An atheist or two pointing out that you are breaking your own rules is not nearly as obnoxious as you make it out to be.

Well, you should be modded down as flamebait, but that doesn't seem to have happened. I don't notice anything useful in your comment.

Of course, you may be a troll, in which case shame on me for responding. But I wasn't even nearly the first, so I don't feel too bad.

More than just that. One of the causes of aging appears to be "tired mitochondria". So you need to make sure that the mitochondira of the cell line is in good shape. Difficult, as (AFAIK) we don't know how to tell when mitochondria aren't acting efficiently in a single cell, only in an organ. And mitochondria are subject to a high rate of mutation, so if you grow a clone*, you want to ensure that all cells in that clone have efficient mitochondria.

*A clone is a cluster of cells grown from a single cell. This would cover an organ as well as an organism. Say, e.g., a new liver or kidney.

OK. Sorry. Make that "canonically isomorphic".

That may be Wikipedia, but it doesn't match standard usage. In neither Norway nor Sweden are the means of production owned by the state...except for some of them, and that's true in the US, too. (E.g., the state owns the Hoover Dam, which is definitely a "means of production".)

And in almost EVERY nation "some sectors of an economy " are "run in a socialist manner, while others" are "run in a capitalist way". Including the US, Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia, etc.

Yes, I am claiming that in every state to the extent that social services are supplied by the state, that state is socialist. And it is not one dimensional. Some states cover some areas, other states cover other areas. A few just leave you to die if you can't make it on your own.

Sample areas of coverage:
1) unemployment coverage.
2) minimal housing
3) minimal heat supply
4) minimal food supply
5) clean air
6) clean water
etc. I notice that I left out health care, but it's just one of many areas I left out. I also, e.g., left out public defenders, police protection, emergency rescue, and many others. Note that every one I've explicitly mentioned is provided, at least to an extent, by the US govt. (sometimes indirectly).

I would also disagree with your definiton of capitalism, though that's certainly a lot closer to being accurate. I think Adam Smith might agree with your definition, but to me the ownership is irrelevant. What's relevant is control and personal reward. Thus to me it would make no difference whether the stock in a corporation were owned by private groups or by a collection of states...what matters is that the control is vested in an individual who is not the representative of a government, and is at most an indirect agent of one. (Adam Smith didn't consider such scenarios, because he disliked corporations, though he did admit that they were occasionally needed...e.g., it would have been difficult to come to another means of dealing with the situation handled by "The Lord Mayor and Corporation of London".)

Not just that. They would rather watch football or Game of Thrones than the current iteration of The Day the Universe Changed. It doesn't matter how much you impress random billionaires or the Ivory Tower education crowd.

You can provide the materials, but there's no gaurantee that anyone will want to use them.

On the other hand, The Great Courses see plenty of Torrent traffic. There's certainly demand for the stuff. Just less than for Expendables 3.

Dunno about LoC's but this is equal to about a single Archos 5.

When these prices come down, I will finally have a reason to retire the old thing (my Archos 5).

One arbitrary roller-coaster is as good as another.