Please hand over your social security number, bank account numbers and all other pertinent information since you don't believe in keeping secrets.
And yet Jonathan Pollard is not only still alive but will be released in November and given a heroes parade in Israel.
Any American, and I do mean anyone, who releases classified information or spies for another country should be given the death penalty. This includes those people whose actions you might agree with.*
However, like so many others, criminals are being coddled rather than punished.
* I may like the fact that Snowden exposed what most of us on here already knew, but his actions do not mitigate the fact he released classified information. As you said, death is one of the consequences of treason/espionage and the Founding Father knew their lives were on the line when they signed off on independence but rather than run, they stayed and fought in whatever manner they could.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong! Google developers get paid buttloads of money, more than you or I could hope to make. These are the elites, the 1% of the 1%.
Because they are so highly paid the problem cannot lie with them since we are repeatedly told if you pay developers what they're worth you will get excellent results. Just like paying CEOs of companies who go running to Uncle Sam to protect them from their own incompetence.
The problem must lie elsewhere. Look harder.
Yes, the government should force the obese to get their act together, especially since that same government is now forcing me to pay for their medical care whether I want to or not.
The same for drug users, smokers and alcoholics.
If the idea is to make people more healthy by forcing them to hand over their money to a private company then to get the most bang for the buck forced government coercion to get people to live more healthy lives is the way to go.
The Chinese did not have electricity nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity.
Many, many moons ago I had picked up some books about the size of a Reader's Digest which had stories from various authors. I cannot remember the name of the publication but one story in them talks about this very subject.
In short, concerts of the day had people wearing headbands which drew upon the electrical energy from each person. This energy was then transmitted to the performers to power their equipment. The more energetic the fans, the more power.
The lead singer of a group eventually uses this energy to commit suicide by wrapping herself in a metal mesh. She discusses this with the other main character in the story.
If anyone knows the name of the story and/or what publication it was from, that would be great.
I guess it's too difficult to leave the physical connections in place. They had to be replaced by shiny, just because.
There's a reason light switches work every single time. Physical connections are superior to digital connections.
Hopefully this won't be like promising new battery tech that's always 5-10 years away. Assuming black phosphoros turns out to be a viable material, how long would it take until chips made with such transistors are actually mass-produced?
You need to correct behaviors and find out the underlying reasons WHY they are doing the things.
Except that parents have plenty of incentive not to find out, because it's their responsibility and probably their fault.
That only increases the urgency of finding out, if the person is really serious about being a parent. Children are supposed to have a life that's better than ours was; they are not supposed to inherit severe character flaws because we were too cowardly to deal with them.
I do agree, though, that there are lots of self-centered (and often emotionally immature) people who really do fit the description you gave. That something might be uncomfortable, or require some effort, or *gasp* involve admitting that they were wrong and need to change, these things are enough to stop such people from doing the right thing no matter how important it may be, no matter how lasting the consequences are. It's even harder to raise a child and help them become an adult when the parent is not really an adult themselves.
You were doing pretty well right up until you mentioned gluten. This near fanaticism with avoiding gluten is approaching the same level of thinking organic foods are more nutritious.
Gluten comes from certain grains. Despite this fact, I have seen products, including fruit itself, labeled as "gluten free" which do not use grain in their production. This article spells it out very nicely:
The researchers noted that many symptoms attributed to gluten may actually be caused by sensitivity to other components of wheat flour or other ingredients found in wheat-based foods like bread, pasta, and breakfast cereals.
Symptoms that have been attributed to gluten sensitivity include diarrhea, abdominal cramping, bloating, headaches, fatigue, and even those associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
Di Sabatino and Corazza write that some people may experience these symptoms when they eat foods containing gluten simply because they believe these foods will make them sick.
They conclude that common sense must prevail to "prevent a gluten preoccupation from evolving into the conviction that gluten is toxic for most of the population."
I'll tell you up-front that I do believe in a God and that this God is the uncaused cause that set everything else into motion. As this is a personal belief, it won't have much to do with my response to you, but I thought I'd mention it to add some perspective. By "personal belief", I mean "go form your own". I for one cannot stand the mindless group-think experience of most churches I've visited and the "security" of being surrounded by the like-minded is worthless. I think Big Questions like "is there a God?" are things you have to decide for yourself.
OK. I find the belief in unfounded god/s is one of the leading causes of murder, rape and mutilation etc throughout history. It has also repeatedly held humanity's progress back and tend to be non-democratic and unreasonable in nature having no place in schools or modern life in general.
The massive mainstream religions have become like a corrupt government. They served a purpose and provided people something they felt they needed, but various control freaks long ago realized they can also be used to control people. Like Jim Marrs says, religion and the monetary system are the two major methods of controlling people. This doesn't mean that currency of some kind has no legitimate use (barter has lots of problems) and it likewise doesn't mean that religion can only control people.
I mean, I've read the Bible. I'm not an expert, but I can say that I'm well familiar with it, specifically the words of Jesus Christ. When I read the words attributed to him, I see exhortations to be humble, to love your neighbor as you love yourself, the importance of forgiveness, turn the other cheek, etc. I've read multiple translations and they all agree on this point. I just can't find any teaching of Jesus that can be construed as "murder, rape, torture, etc are all perfectly acceptable". Those calling themselves Christian and claiming to have read the same Bible should have observed the same.
I argue that if there was a god he/she/it would not need any believers nor would he need them to be offended to defend his/her/its name or honour.
The actual concern for this comes from the idea that the Creator wants to have a relationship with the created, rather than just watch us like an aquarium or snow globe. It's also believed that people have an inherent longing for such a connection and don't have a full life without it.
The perversion used to control people is this idea that you must behave a certain way and become a certain typecast sort of person or else you're faulty in some serious way. It's just a way to enforce conformity, not in a "top-down" way but in such a way that the conformists themselves would feel ashamed to appear otherwise.
I've also argued to more than one religious person, that I doubt a term like "god dammit" would actually offend any serious God-concept. It seems like a childish position to me, to envision God as some sort of scolding parent. I know human beings who wouldn't actually be offended by terms they dislike; why should Almighty God be more petty than they? It just makes no sense to me.
If I believe, wholly and deeply in divine pink unicorns a legislation demanding that others respect such an unfounded belief would be an insult.
If you also had multiple witnesses providing written accounts of this, and said unicorns performed what appeared to be miracles in front of large crowds, and many people found this convincing and credible, well then you might be onto something.
The very questioning of belief is repeatedly a cause to offend some. After all, the only unforgivable sin is to deny the holy spirit, should such a spirit exist in the unlikely event that spirits become factual.
My own concept of God includes a desire for us to question everything worthwhile, and this certainly qualifies. Einstein said "the most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible". I personally wouldn't want to create mindless robots with no sense of awe or mystery, no genuinely satisfying curiosity; they would never reach their full potential. If I can see what would be direly wrong with that, I assume a being infinitely more advanced than myself can also see this.
If by "unforgivable sin" you refer to Mark 3:22-30 and Matthew 12:31-32, this refers to permanently rejecting the Holy Spirit. In the context of Mark 3:22-30 the Pharisees tried to falsely attribute Jesus's powers to Satan ("ruler of the demons"). This represents a conscious rejection, a misunderstanding so profound that its bearer actively resists truth, even when it happens in front of them. It's the idea of someone seeing an act of God and calling it evil. In many matters not involving religion, this is how psychotic people operate: they've convinced themselves that the wrong thing to do is expedient, justified, expected, etc and therefore good ("greater good" is a common one).
Like Bill Hicks mentioned, I personally suspect that we are God's way of experiencing Itself subjectively. That would make questioning, reasoning, and personal refinement all the more important.
Not exactly a front-page story anymore, but when I read your post, it got me thinking.
the death penalty is still needed. These acts aren't being done by some random, clueless junkie trying to sell copper to get their fix. The number and location shows someone, or someones, are deliberately cutting the fiber whether because they're t'rrists (unlikely), general vandals (possible) or some neo-luddite who thinks it's fun to screw around (possible).
As the article relates, the penalties aren't severe enough. Well guess what is. . .
However, the reason to not jaywalk is simply because the vast majority of people take the longest possible route to cross the street (i.e. diagonal) rather than straight across which exposes you to more traffic and thus a greater chance of being hit.
It's funny. Having an abortion is wrong, in your eyes, yet people such as yourself have no problem with women smoking, drinking, doing drugs or being obese while pregnant.
Apparently it's a crime, in your eyes, to "kill" the fetus in one fell swoop, but slowly strangling or poisoning the unborn is perfectly acceptable.
When you and your kind start protesting around pregnant women who do/are any of the above, or work toward laws to force pregnant women to lead healthy lives to, you know, protect the life of the unborn, then we can talk.
The difference is the shooting in Sydney was one, isolated incident. Compare that incident to the daily shootings in the U.S.
The rinky dink city I live just outside of (less than 50K people) has had shootings almost every day this week.
One could argue any law won't stop someone from doing something (murder in general, theft, rape) but that does not mean we should get rid of all laws and let people do what they want.
What should happen is more strict enforcement of current laws and more severe punishment. That includes the death penalty for murder and rape. Once you start getting rid of the criminals on a regular basis, people will start to think twice about committing the crime, not to mention if you get them early enough they won't have a chance to reproduce and pass along their defective genes.