I meant to add other examples of "just discrimination" -- namely the following legal prohibitions:
-- prohibiting cohabiting couples with SSAD to adopt children whom they will raise improperly (and potentially abuse sexually);
-- prohibiting women with SSAD to be artificially inseminated, so that they can "mother" children whom they will raise improperly;
-- prohibiting people with SSAD to lead boy/girl scout groups (for obvious reasons).

It's a simple fact -- a fact that cannot be changed (by brain-washing, denial, whining, etc.) -- that "homosexuality" [now known as SSAD = Same-Sex Attraction Disorder] is a psychosexual abnormality.

It is a disorder suffered by just 1 or 2% of the population -- not the (now multiple-times debunked) 10% figure, invented in the 1940s or 1950s. It is not a normal condition, as millennia of human society's have always known. No amount of propaganda (fueled by vast sums of cash) can change the facts or deceive the majority of the populace. Almost everyone knows, in their "heart of hearts," that people who have SSAD are not normal. And almost every adult who has the chance to read about the degrading sexual practices of SSAD sufferers comes away with an absolute certainty that SSAD is truly a psychological abnormality.

With every passing year, the evidence grows (collected by therapists) that these poor people are suffering from a disorder that they didn't choose, don't genuinely enjoy, and don't really want to keep. To overcome their great degree of (appropriate) shame, some of them desperately seek societal approval, instead of seeking the "reparative therapy" that is available. Over the past two decades, it has become crystal clear to the best physicians in the field that the disorder is caused by events early in the patient's life -- partly events that have happened to him/her and partly the absence of events that should have happened (involving parents, especially fathers).

Contrary to some widespread propaganda, there has never been any proof that a genetic component is involved. It is possible, however, that scientists may some day discover a gene that "predisposes" a person (i.e., makes more likely) to slip into this psychological problem -- just as it is believed that there is a gene that makes people of certain ethnic origins to be more likely to be an alcoholic. The mere presence of such genes (related to SSAD or alcoholism) does not make these improper behaviors "normal." Rather, they are disorders to be avoided/cured to the extent possible.

Thank God, the therapists are having some (though not yet 100%) success in helping SSAD sufferers to be cured. Some have even become legitimately married (to people of the opposite sex) and have become parents.

People who suffer from SSAD should be treated with complete dignity and should not be victims of unjust discrimination [just discrimination -- yes, but not UNjust discrimination]. An example of "just discrimination" is keeping men with SSAD away from certain situations with boys.

What is this "CE" garbage? How dare you offend the vast majority of your readers, who are Christians? The proper abbreviation is "AD," short for "anno Domini," which is Latin for "(in) the year of the Lord (Jesus Christ)." Please have some guts, and stop being offensive and "politically correct" at the same time. People can try to play games by using "CE," but the bottom line is that the number of the year refers to the number of years after the birth of Jesus, so there's no point in trying (and failing) to mask that fact, while also offending people. Thank you.

Jon, you are correct (almost).
Amy Walker is from Langley, Washington -- near Seattle. She was born on New Year's Day, 1979. She was fibbing when she said she was 25!

Miss Cellania and Jess are dead wrong. They are too young to understand this ad or the era in which it was produced. I was born in the early 1950s, and I can assure everyone that the ad WAS meant to be funny -- and not to convey the idea that it was OK or common for a husband to spank a wife. The ad was a sort of exaggeration/caricature. The fact is that, collectively speaking, men were MORE respectful of women prior to 1960 than they have been since that year. There is FAR MORE hatred and disdain and objectifying of women by men in our day than there was in the 1950s -- primarily because of the availability of (1) no-fault divorce, (2) hormonal birth control and abortion, and (3) a bad strain of "women's liberation" that masculinized many women.

Bookmark the site below, and go back once a week to remind yourself who is in the right and who is in the wrong here. (Whoever made, and whoever posted, the pro-Moslem video clip was one mental midget.)
GO HERE, PLEASE, AND LOOK AT IT, TOP TO BOTTOM:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

"... could eliminate the need to use embryos to generate cells ...".

WHAT???

There is not, never was, and never will be a "need" to use embryos to generate cells. This so called "use" of the embryo entails the MURDER of the embryo. A human embryo is a human being, a person, with a right to life no less than yours and mine. It doesn't want its stem cells removed, causing its death!

Thank you, God, for helping mankind to find a morally acceptable source of "pluripotent" stem cells, to use in addition to the already phenomenally helpful "adult" stem cells, which have helped cure over seventy diseases (while embryonic stem cells, the product of murder, have cured none).

It's a very nice tribute to one of America's greatest presidents.

Shabby! Not only is a commenter trying to pull a fast one (with a phony phrase, "in exemplum," for "i.e."), but also the main post has an error in each explanation of three additional abbreviations,
(1) "C.f." should be "Cf." -- without the extra period.
(2) "Etc." is not "the abbreviation for "etcetera" -- but rather the abbreviation for "et cetera" (with a space between the two Latin words).
(3) "QED" is not the "abbreviation for quod erat demonstradum" -- but rather the abbreviation for "quod erat demonstrandum" (with an "n" before the second "d."
Tsk, tsk!