The name Rome and Greece must be changed, because those symbols (names are symbols) are offensive...so must Egypt, Russia, pretty much every country in the world. Native Americans need to get rid of their symbols as well--all that scalping and such...Lets not even talk about anything related to men--who have been nothing but rapist control freaks, especially in places like India where women are burned alive with their husbands...God, we have a lot of symbols to kill bud--nearly every symbol made by humans...

*dead

Not covering one of the fundamentally most important healthcare need is kind of stupid. Teeth health is linked with heart health, among numerous other thing. Not sure why we would then cover one (heart) if the teeth make the heart happy.

But the real problem is that we consume far too much grain and animals that eat grain, as opposed to things with the other essential omega fats...1:7 ratio--even though it should be 1:1 ratios.

Oh, and 23 billion dollars...omg! That's pennies on the dollar over the entire world's economy...

But certainly he is okay with circumcisions in third world countries since, as he noted, it does prevent certain diseases that kill? I see no reason to do it in the first and second world countries, but other nations live in conditions like old world Israel... Like the pope's distaste for condoms in Africa. He can suck a dick (The pope can)

And you cant say it either. So the point is moot. It's like a child born without a leg saying it doesn't affect his life any differently than if he had another leg. You're basically saying hey legless, you don't know because you never had that leg.

You were saying "and promotes the security of the few at the expense of the many."

I disagree. I think this policy makes everyone, even the "few", less safe...

Yeah, it is wrong. But the people demanded it and the people got it (Ie., corporations with the consent of regular folks.)

I guess there is a thinly veiled point in the policies defense, and the defense doesn't amount to shit. How dare a criminal work for me when there is liability to myself or customers! Yeah...

Or it's the balanced ones who realize it is better to help a system than to be a part of the problem, on either side. Your fine to have your beliefs, but you win nothing.

I really wish police were not even needed. But then we would be Afghanistan or some African country. We must understand that the base human condition is evil, vile, raping, murdering, and that laws, ie., the enforcement of laws, ie., law enforcement, would best be served balancing those impulses out.

Your wrong @eric3579. There is no protection for the wealthy--it only looks good to them but everyone is less safe for these policies.

But I must correct one injustice (among a few others) that John was wrong on. Most, and by most I mean most, solitary confinement of inmates does have both appeals policies inside the jail/prison and Judaical recourse. It is not foolproof, but lawsuits have vindicated many people. As such, this forced policies in place when confining an inmate.

Not to mention that many prisoners are mentally unstable as is--just like many homeless are. I am not saying to punish them. The medications they receive in prisons and in jails really are helpful in keeping them functioning in general population these days and should be the first reliance. They really do go above and beyond in many jails/prisons. However, someone who would rip out his own eyeball or shove a pencil up his penis, someone known to be violent, or even those severely handicapped and who would be abused, they must be protected. This guy doesn't point out this--instead it's generalized as ALL torture.

Imagine your son being raped in prison violently by someone with mental illness, just because he couldn't be justified as a danger for his entire stay... Happens every day, and so do the lawsuits. It's an impossible balance really.

And indefinite is a misnomer. 30 days is a common number of maximum days a person can be held in solitary for disciplinary infractions. While this doesn't seem like a lot of time, I understand it's a LIFETIME to spend alone in a room that is abysmal. However, it is definitely not indefinite.

Additionally, the total ratio of inmates incarcerated in general population versus is about 5%. That's pretty small considering the totality of circumstances and general population inmates whose crimes are serious in nature.

As someone who has studied this issue indepth for the last 7-8 years I can say the jail/prison system is a failure on multiple aspects. It causes more crime. It hurts people who would be better served elsewhere. It is racially biased. In most cases there is no way out. However, in the dawning of the age of cameras, much has changed for the better. The fact that guards are charged with crimes for obvious abuse is one. The fact that solitary confinement is now working well is another. Prison populations are expanding less and less.

We should expand upon the good, instead of focus on the bad.

Rambling must be fun.

The problem isn't that there are warlords. The problem is that they are replaceable. Kill one, ten more weeds pop up. In fact, with the size of the world and population, all that you are asking is getting rid of weeds, say, in the State of Florida. Not a big task in a small garden, but... (I am speaking of the replacement rate, which is much higher than the current number of war lords and their lackeys.)

So when you don't wear proper protection heat escapes most from that area. Yes, which means most of it escapes through people's heads (Because fewer people wear hats than pants) and therefore it isn't a myth (Although I knew this answer before watching the video anyways.)

Like how if everyone always wore condoms and had a lot of oral sex it would be likely that most sexually transmitted diseases would be spread how? But by his point it would be false and silly to warn people...