Do You have verifiable citations for those statistics?

... a plan to "fix" the Bill of Rights, amendments which have guided and protected Americans for over two centuries, I get very leery.

Coverity is no the best "yardstick". Too many false negatives and too expensive.

May I suggest AC acquire and use a dictionary. From the OED=>"republic (noun): a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch." Sounds like the United States. There is also Article IV, Section 1, of the constitution which reads in part, "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government"; so, if this guarantee has not been met, the first step is to "petition the Government for a redress of grievances" instead of throwing around insults; unless, of course, AC doesn't actually believe what AC wrote.

[begin sarcasm]You mean having 1 voice in ~310,000,000 is negligible? Inconceivable![end sarcasm]

Cherry picking, even cherry-picking-lite with conditional words like "some", is easy. The question is whether this "some" represents a non-negligible amount.

Placing a sales tax of, say, 1% would go far at discouraging any excessive amount of trading, for some definition of "excessive", while helping to shift the tax burden off Those less able to afford it.

Can We stop conflating the brain with the Mind, please? The Mind is a philosophical concept and the brain is a physical organ. The two ideas are distinctly different and their conflation speaks of gross ignorance.

I am not sure One can classify any system of faith, a.k.a. "religion", as either "good" or "bad" as a general rule; a large, if not overwhelming, factor is how the Adherant/Advocate interprets and/or applies said religion. For example, I know a large number of pacifist Muslims and the word "Crusades" come readily to Mind, as do the names "Mother Theresa" and "Osama Bin Laden". Like fire, religion is but a tool to Our benefit, individually and collectively; it is what We do with it which matters.

I doubt religion was the problem either. Could it not be Anyone using religion to try to justify an injustice is really just an Asshole and would have found some other excuse if religion did not exist?

The connection strikes Me as questionable because, if We are going to compare anecdotes, My faith has only strengthened the more I have used the internet. For example, game theory in some ways backs up Christianity's Golden Rule, one recent Slashdot article suggests religion packages multiple psychological and/or physiological benefits better than just about any other institution, information on M-theory (which I would not have been able to access as readily without the internet) suggests the universe originated in a way which may be inherently untestable just like religion, the vehemence with which Some present hostility to People of faith simply because such Persons are People of faith leads Me to wonder just how much do said professed "Skeptics" are "Skeptics" because They genuinely doubt all religions or whether They are "Skeptics" because They are what Some might call "Assholes". If the internet has caused Some to lose Their faith, it may be such Persons were pre-disposed to doubt to begin with and the internet merely gave that final "push" instead of the internet taking Someone devout and transmogrifying Them into, say, Richard Dawkins, Jr.

Explain FoxNews.