All this technology is entirely impressive. But how does the comrades turn this into money?

The cold hard cash is coming. AAGP has dozens of commercial and medical uses. Sanction to’s choose fell care. AAGP promotes longevity in sore cells. Wrinkles are a the issue of skins cells that no longer adhere properly to neighboring cells. Shell cream infused with AAGP can prolong the of use existence of shell cells in areas of the face susceptible to wrinkling. PKTX is in discussions with a dominating cosmetics company.

As in behalf of medical applications, AAGP works to raise the yields of transplanted cells. Whether those cells are derive cells or another diversity of specialized cell, adding AAGP to the medical procedure increases the slews of cells that predisposed to the policy in the hip host. Hospitals, laboratories, and researchers throughout the fantastic will-power identify uses recompense AAGP.

Buy PKTX

*Whistles*… ah good, peace and quiet!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eoVbihkZdLY

Enjoy

@Rev larry:

Firstly Rev, I don’t need a history lesson dear. I can’t believe how silly you are, twist it whatever way you want, I really don’t care, the truth remains. Not the truth you claim from your religion, or the truth any religion claims for that matter. You choose to preach fear and hatred, it may work amongst your flock, but here where everyone is allowed to have their own opinion, it is useless.

Haven’t we seen this before?! Quoting history in order to gain the moral high ground? I Think his name was Bill!!!

Secondly Rev, I am no liar! You are a disgrace! On the water, not so long ago, during the summer, I watched as a fellow coxswain pulled a child from the water, who was lying with his face underwater, after being knocked out by a boom. That child was saved, yes his life was prolonged (can’t argue with that, he, like us all will die someday), but you try telling that to him or his parents!

You moved on from talking about my hate to calling me a liar, it’s clearly getting harder and harder for you to clutch at those straws!

You keep spreading that hate amongst this lovely blog of gay news and soft porn, and I will keep up the rescue and youth-work, trying to ensure that young people grow up balanced, for example try to stamp out homophobia amongst them!

Why is it fitting to ask this question as we approach the Thanksgiving holiday? Well, it’s precisely the Thanksgiving holiday that reminds us of the origins of the phrase, separation of church and state.

In 1620, a group of Christian pilgrims known as the Separatists washed ashore in what came to be known as Plymouth, Massachusetts. They first left England to escape religious persecution there. They landed in Holland but realized Holland was not a place that allowed their faith to flourish. They set sail again; this time for America.

When the pilgrims set up their colony in Plymouth, Massachusetts, they soon employed a policy that came out of their own struggles for religious freedom. They employed the first American policy of a separation of church and state.

This may seem like a counterintuitive decision for a group of deeply religious people. However, the Separatists knew full well that when the power of the church is placed under the control of the government, the government then begins to mandate its own sanctioned religious practice. The Separatists had endured the religious persecution of the state in England and wanted to ensure that no such persecution would occur in America. Unlike the Puritans, who believed in establishing some form of a Theocracy, these Separatists, being true to their name, decided to separate the two entities of the church and the state so as to allow the free expression of religion to flourish. That is precisely what happened. Early America in the 1600’s saw many religious groups and sects set up colonies that were specifically designed for the free expression of their religion without government interference. That is what the separation of church and state is really all about: keeping the government out of the church’s business.

Fast forward to the writing of our nation’s Bill of Rights in 1789. Founding fathers like Patrick Henry and James Madison knew that allowing a mandated government religious practice would stifle religious expression in the new nation. They decided to embrace what is the most harmonious balance between the federal government and the church that the world has ever seen. They wrote the First Amendment of the Constitution.

In the First Amendment we see the balance between the federal government’s role in protecting religious practice and not coercing it. The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, which guarantees all Americans the freedom of speech, religion, press, petition and assembly, has this to say about religious practice: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

The federal government cannot mandate a religious practice, nor can they prohibit religious practice. Unfortunately, in the last few decades we have seen many judicial rulings that demonstrate a desire to uphold the establishment clause of the First Amendment at the expense of the free exercise clause. This is completely contrary to the purpose of the First Amendment and a violation of it as well.

The first major case that undermined the balance between the establishment clause and the free exercise clause occurred in 1947. In Everson vs. Board of Education the Supreme Court, led by Justice Hugo Black, an FDR appointee and member of the Ku Klux Klan, reinterpreted the meaning of the First Amendment of the Constitution. This decision set in motion an unconstitutional chain of events that has undermined our First Amendment liberties ever since.

Just what did Justice Black and the other FDR appointees to the Supreme Court do? They hijacked a phrase used by President Thomas Jefferson, “separation of church and state,” found in a letter he wrote to the Danville Baptist Association in Virginia (1802). Jefferson’s letter was actually used by the court to limit religious freedom.

By taking completely out of context the phrase used by Jefferson in his letter, “separation of church and state,” the Supreme Court ruled that the freedom of religious expression in the public square was a violation of the “separation of church and state” found in the Constitution. This is an astounding ruling, as the phrase “separation of church and state” is not even found in the Constitution.

In 1947, the Supreme Court actually used Jefferson’s letter to the Danville Baptists as the basis for their decision, even though his letter is not Constitutional law. This is another example of the Progressive Bait and Switch tactic at work that I spoke of in my last article with Townhall.

Another interesting fact concerning Jefferson’s use of the phrase, “separation of church and state” is its true meaning. Thomas Jefferson used this phrase as nothing more than a metaphor to express the First Amendment’s role as a protector of religious expression in the public square. So even if Jefferson’s letter was Constitutional law, Hugo Black and the other FDR appointees on the Supreme Court still misinterpreted the meaning of Jefferson’s letter and the separation of church and state.

In his letter to the Danville Baptist Association, President Jefferson said he believed there was a “wall of separation” in the Constitution that was designed to keep the government from interfering in the affairs of the church, not a wall to keep free speech out of the public arena. Thankfully, the Supreme Court finally clarified what Jefferson truly meant in Lynch vs. Donnelly (1984) when they said that the phrase “separation of church and state” is nothing more than the opinion of Thomas Jefferson, a “euphemism” as they put it, not Constitutional law.

While the 1984 case was a breath of fresh air to those who love liberty, the damage of the 1947 case has led to other terrible decisions that defy logic, reason and the Constitution itself. In fact, the 1947 ruling, in spite of being inaccurate and unconstitutional, has become part of the American collective consciousness.

In what has become the most infamous Supreme Court ruling regarding religious speech, Engel vs. Vitale (1962), the Supreme Court reinterpreted the meaning of the establishment clause in the First Amendment and misused its authority to ban the free exercise of religion in schools. This is the famous school prayer case.

@Rev larry: Oh rev, we have had this already. No one said/will say that dear old Rev Larry didn’t warn us!

“if it isnt spelled correctly since you would not know the truth any way! ” …
I am not saying that spelling changes the message, but your posts are a rant of bad spelling and poor punctuation; this does not do you any favors!

How dare you, I do not hate as your rant implied. I am a valued member of my community and I serve it in my own way, through youth work, and saving lives at sea!

“When you find out I’m right,” Rev let me tell you, everyone thinks they are right, it can lead them into doing what they think is right, and I respect that you think you are right, but I think what you are doing is perverse. You actually do have ( DENY IT ALL YOU LIKE, IT’S POSTED FOR ALL TO SEE!) a lot of hate in you.

I wish I had a little bit longer here, but what’s the point, you will just miss the point anyway!

I’d love to give him a reason to avoid posts. Or the entire blog, for that matter.

(don’t want to give this person a reason to avoid posts:P Not that he needs one)

Please don’t reply to me trying to dodge the point and rant about sharia law, your techniques of avoidance and fear will not wash with me!

You rant about Islam for some unknown reason, I am well aware of the terrible crimes that occur in the name of Their god. Don’t wash your hands of the lives taken in the name of your god, christianity did not only spread through “peaceful means.”

So really it’s a question of the religion you know, or the religion you don’t.

Your trashing of the first amendment is dangerous to say the least, the US principles are supposed to determine how the country is goverened, but it seems to me that you are fine with religion dictating, so long as it is christianity.

To try to get questions answered by those who are, well, not willing to answer them, is a hard thing to do!

Jeez preaching fear on a website which contains soft porn, give it a rest!!!
Now please either “sh*t or get off the pot.”

Dude.

This is not a bible study blog. If we wanted to read that, we’d go to one.

And if God wanted to force us all to be christians, we wouldn’t have been given free will in the first place.

Go away.

I’m very sorry Rev, your comments are strung together very poorly, maybe if you actually had better arguments they would flow better.

Separation of church and state IS a widely accepted legal policy derived from the first amendment, it is not used in the amendment, but Thomas Jefferson used in a letter.
I think this is pretty weak coming from a christian, I mean look at the bible, even if it was true principles are drawn from stories in the life of Jesus.

I could provide as weak an argument as that by saying the word homosexual was never in the bible, but wait, it was put there by a publisher not that long ago, and queerty covered it. Just think, that is now, and think of all the translations.

You missed the point, you should keep your beak out of “state” relations, I suspect it was the fear and hate, added to by ministers like yourself that brought this situation about. One where the rights of homosexuals are pissed up against the wall.

Quite funny to see you throw your toys out of the pram Rev, you’re maybe not the best person to try and convince us we are wrong. I see you claim I am not acting in any “rational” way, exactly what gives you the right to say this? I am acting rationally, you are the one preaching on a website which contains soft porn, give it a rest!

I’m very sorry Rev, your comments are strung together very poorly, maybe if you actually had better arguments they would flow better.

Separation of church and state IS a widely accepted legal policy derived from the first amendment, it is not used in the amendment, but Thomas Jefferson used in a letter.
I think this is pretty weak coming from a christian, I mean look at the bible, even if it was true principles are drawn from stories in the life of Jesus.

I could provide as weak an argument as that by saying the word homosexual was never in the bible, but wait, it was put there by a publisher not that long ago, and queerty covered it. Just think, that is now, and think of all the translations.

You missed the point, you should keep your beak out of “state” relations, I suspect it was the fear and hate, added to by ministers like yourself that brought this situation about. One where the rights of homosexuals are pissed up against the wall.

Quite funny to see you throw your toys out of the pram Rev, you’re maybe not the best person to try and convince us we are wrong. I see you claim I am not acting in any “rational” way, exactly what gives you the right to say this? I am acting rationally, you are the one preaching on a website which contains soft porn, give it a rest!

Amendment II,

Judge not…

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone…

Get thee out of my house.

Pay special attention to that last one, Lawrence.

You can’t miss this one Rev… http://www.queerty.com/i-dont-.....ment-98425

Or do you not agree with the First Amendment?… Doesn’t always suit, does it :(

You may have a point, but do you have to be so vulgar?

Just because YOU feel passionately about something DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE.

If the ‘Lord” has something to say to me or anyone else than HE will say so. We Don’t need YOU to tell us anything.

Your speeches mean nothing here. Nobody is listening. It’s just fun to banter back and forth with you and all the other idiots.

Like they say “MONKEY see MONKEY do”!
How Appropro!