Suppose many people find most religious texts offensive, but for some strange reason Amazon won't ban them, yet Amazon will cave to religious groups and ban materials that only the religious groups deem offensive? Religion is, after all, the most likely source of most violence and suffering in the world. Religious people have no more claim on morality than atheists. Ban nothing and let the readers decide for themselves, OR use logic and reason and ban all that is offensive to everyone. Which would you choose?

Put copies of the invention documents into an envelope, seal it, and mail it to yourself. But don't ever open it, and put it in a safe deposit box, or in your bomb shelter. The postmark is legal proof that you have prior art.

Ah, I stand corrected about the telomeres. It appears that independent studies on the length of telomere chains in cloned animals disagreed with each other (high error margin?), and the media originally reported the worst case scenario. I see now that the actual consensus appears to be that the telomeres are not depleted in the clone. I am not against cloning whole animals, or even parts of animals or the human animal, with the assistance of stem cell technologies. I think that the acceptance of the ability to repair or replace one's damage d or missing body parts will be a major breakthrough. Cloning is probably not all that difficult once you have the lab set up, so these companies charging $100,000 for a cloned pet will likely probably have a high profit margin. However, their entire business model depends on their clients emotional state, which is borderline ethical in my opinion. I also think they're charging way too much. Otherwise, I'd run down to the hardware store and get a Cloninator for the home, if there was such a thing, to bring back the facsimile of my little dog.