Conversely, I would rather find out if someone is has a prevalent rape culture, and have people's thoughts on it be in public, just in case there are some creeps I'd rather not associate with.

Huh? I thought in this country parents decided on a child's name and surname, and the state only recorded the parents' decision?

If enough people in a community consider it a crime, it's a crime, regardless of whether there are governments or laws involved. Whether "crime" is the right word to use at that point is just a question of semantics. I don't like to use "immoral," because not everything considered "immoral" is unethical, and just saying "unethical" just doesn't have the same intensity of meaning. If you would prefer some other term for an act that a society, with or without government, considers extremely wrong and requiring restitution, let me know.

Please answer this question, as no one ever does: Who paid for that military force or that police, and why can't they pay for it directly if there was no government?

Question

... and please, keep in mind that this is coming from someone who is a royal count, with a very rich family history spanning centuries, from Italy, through Poland, Russia, and Ukraine, from someone who comes from a long history of very prominent and well known scientists, who's great*3-grandfather even has a giant portrait and permanent exhibit at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington DC ...

Why bother tracing one's lineage, whether through mothers or fathers, in the first place? What's so special about the dead people you came from?

That was f'in hilarious! Thanks 

Please don't call yourself dumb, and don't limit yourself in what you can achieve. That right there is the single worst thing about religion, where it convinces people that they will never understand, and makes them stop trying.

Won't those corruptible people quickly learn that anyone who gets into that position will get bullied out of it?


Won't the mafia types quickly learn that if they become bullies there will be other bullies secretly paid to come gunning for them?


How? Why can't the bully with the most lunch money just convince that kid that all other bullies but him are bad, too? Isn't that's what we're having happen to our government, where the biggest corporate bullies are buying the most candy for the retarded kids in the Senate, so they throw their weight around and bully other smaller businesses and citizens?

Bring in a third party that both of the first two parties agree to use, to make sure there are no conflicts of interest such as these, and have both of the first two pay the third one. Everybody wins.

I remember those times, too. I would get angry with him about something in my life, but I would feel comforted, as if he understood me, and that he would stay by my side. Whatever hardships I personally had with god, despite making me a bit angry or frustrated with him at times, never made me question him. The point at which it started to unravel was when I expanded my world from just "me me me" and started being angry at god for others. I couldn't simply be angry at god, have my words with him, have him comfort me, and have that be over with. I would be angry with god about something outside of me, things I saw being done to others I loved or cared about, then I would have words with god, and after seeing nothing be done or changed, things would stay unresolved, and I would be left with nothing but more questions.

And I have said it several times, too. I did not "write off" the experience. It was an integral part of my life, and I've felt the same way you do. So the whole process was quite a gut-wrenching struggle, one I fought very hard against, clinging to my religion as hard as I could, and trying to continue to convince myself of why god and my faith were real. But, at some point, I just got to where I couldn't reconcile what I believed with what I knew. And now I realize that it was all in my head, and I feel so much more free and happy because of it.

nets and traps. I don't have to go out and look for people to shoot, just sit and wait for them to come to me and check the traps once in a while 

Sorry to use that way overused meme, but I do not think that word means what you think it means. Either of those. Just so we don't go around in circles, instead of assuming that the rest of us have any clue as to what you are talking about, can you actually explain what you mean, without using words like "capitalism," "collectivism," and "matrilineal"?

That likely has a lot to do with most people here just struggling to survive paycheck-to-paycheck, bill-to-bill, let along build up capital. Wealthy corporations and individuals give to charity all the time though. Even Wal-Mart.

Yes


No. Just software that can store and transfer bitcoins. Exchanges work on the software that transfers between cash and bitcoins. This would be like telling World of Warcraft to get a MTB license because people on eBay trade their currency for cash.


Yes


I really don't know. I would think that if my organization was being sponsored by Bank of America, and I pointed that fact out at one of my conferences, thus giving them advertising in exchange, that I would not have to register as a bank?


I wish I could. Logically, none of this makes any sense. But then again not only I Am Not A Lawyer, but I Am Not A Crazy Person either. And I am starting to suspect these people might be.

To use your bully analogy, what if everyone on the school yard had a money system that made it impossible for the bully to collect his yearly gains? Or if enough of the people were so tired of the bully that they started using their untraceable money system to buy protection against the bully, or even worse, fund a private team of bullies to harass and bully that main bully in return? How long would that first big bully maintain power and want to keep bullying? As for the second team of bullies, they were hired to take out the first bully using this system, so they are aware that the same system can be used against them as well, so I would hope they would focus more on protection against other bullies, than just becoming bullies themselves.


What if, instead of focusing on taking out number 1 bully, and just having number 2 come in, we focused on making number 1 bully's job irrelevant and impossible to maintain? Simply by abstaining from doing whatever the bully wants, and abstaining from supporting him personally and financially? That was, it wouldn't be bully 1 that fades into obscurity, it would be his seat of power. At that point it won't matter who sits in it. And if everyone abstains from supporting seats of power, by not following their orders or refusing to fund them, then the power vacuum will be taken up by all the people as a whole, holding control over their own governance, as opposed to some individual bully.


What if the bully, with all his stolen lunch money, starts buying lots of candy for the kid with gigantism?

TECSHARE used the wrong term. This topic isn't "self moderated," it's "OP moderated." Self moderated would be posters moderating, editing, and deleting their own posts. The "Libertarian and Anarchist" thing to do. OP moderated is that other thing.

As a matter of fact, yes, I can. I grew up non-religious (was just never taught anything about it, coming from USSR, which is why I believe babies are both atheist), then I was taught about religion, and was a catholic for many years growing up. I believed wholeheartedly, and got all those friend benefits and happy feelings from my personal relationship with god, thinking god was looking over me and such. So I know the feeling you describe. I just got over it, and now look back at it in much the same way you probably remember the glee and excitement you've felt as a child, when you were expecting Santa to come with gifts.

And thing is, many, if not almost all, atheists from USA were religious at one point, too, feeling the same way you do. We all live in a very religious country, and it's almost impossible to grow up without someone trying to convince you of christianity (at least it was a few decades ago). So it's not that atheists "don't get it" because they "don't understand the feeling and relationship you get from god." They do, because they've had it too. So it's not that atheists think you guys are crazy. They just think you are still diluded and confused. Which is perfectly fine, as long as you keep your fantasies to yourselves. In part because we feel embarrassed for you, and in part because you guys try to convince those in power to turn your fantasies into laws.

I'm sure that applies to taxes, as a he-said-she-said kinda dispute about revenues that needs to be resolved, but this seems pretty cut and dry. They said Bitcoin Foundation does the functions of a money transmitter. Bitcoin Foundation does no such thing. Not even close. There isn't even anything for TBF to show to prove that they are not. Unless these bureaucrats come up with something like "Bitcoin Foundation is hiding the evidence that they are transmitting money!" there is quite literally nothing for TBF to show or prove...
right?

But if you are not actually doing the thing they are accusing you of doing, and you tell them that you have stopped doing it, you aren't lying, right? It wouldn't be saying, "I am not doing this, please prove that I am," it's simply "I stopped doing it."
I guess they can still fine you, claiming that you are still doing the thing you've never done in the first place