Travis In Austin

I guess it is how you define "war". They had half of France including Paris and they gave that all away. But once they/we solidified as a people they were able to fend off any invasion including the Spainish Armada. Yet civil wars created such havoc they invited William of Orange and James' daughter to come over and run things. They were the greatest and mightiest power in the world only to be considered a second rate country by the Suez Canel Crisis. However, they were able to show some of that old British fortitude in the War over the Falklands.

So I was looking to see if there were studies about helmet laws and organ donors, and sure enough there is a correlation. http://econpapers.repec.org/article/ucpjlawec/doi_3a10.1086_2f661256.htm "Abstract: Traffic safety mandates are typically designed to reduce the harmful externalities of risky behaviors. We consider whether motorcycle helmet laws also reduce a beneficial externality by decreasing the supply of viable organ donors. Our central estimates show that organ donations resulting from fatal motor vehicle accidents increase by 10 percent when states repeal helmet laws. Two features of this association suggest that it is causal: first, nearly all of it is concentrated among men, who account for over 90 percent of all motorcyclist deaths, and second, helmet laws are unrelated to the supply of donors who die in circumstances other than motor vehicle accidents. The estimates imply that every death of a helmetless motorcyclist prevents or delays as many as .33 death among individuals on organ transplant waiting lists." I agree with you, it should be a choice, but law should be if you die without helmet you automatically agree to organ donation unless you specifically opt out.

SNL will be Prince tribute with previous SNL apperances tonight. Good news if you have been enjoying learning more about him Bad news if you have seen enough.

What's your feeling on mandatory helmet laws? When I was in Nevada I worked on briefs getting their new helmut law held unconstitutional some 30 years ago. Texas is sort of different, to ride without a helmet you have to take a special class and pass a special test.

Wouldn't they be brain dead when the surgeon says that in front of them as she removes their corneas, kidneys, heart, liver and lungs? They would not have the balls to do it any other way. Especially if they are female.

You really can't see that difference? I think that was joking about the death of a real person. Here I think the discussion is about risk acceptance of a GROUP vs. the death of an individual. It is more analogous to talking about golfing in a lightning storm, smokers, test pilots, etc.

Wouldn't they be brain dead when the surgeon says that in front of them as she removes their corneas, kidneys, heart, liver and lungs?

Or I guess that is him after getting out of crate

I'll say, Enegizer Bunny times 10. Was he excited about his crate, or was that a normal show? Handsome fella.

As I tell my Scottish ancestory wife and business partner when they whine about the English: "You should have fought harder" and whom would the English be able to send in first on the next push on Berlin if not the Irish, Scottish or Welsh Guards? With the usual clever plan; they even get the Scots to make a god-awful racket with bagpipes to annoy the Bosch and draw their fire. I think that is certainly true by WWII.But I guess the reason I like the history of England so much is that there actually is a history going back an incredibly long way. Who are the English? The Celts Romans Jutes, Angles and Saxons The Vikings The Danes and Cnut King Edward and the Anglo-Saxons The Normans and their friends the Britons Edgar the last remaining British King running to the Scots for help William going to Scotland, Malcolm agreeing to give Edgar the boot That nasty business with the French Invasion of Wales by Normans Invasion of Scots by England, and then in reverse in the Scotish Wars The French invasion again in the 100 Years War The Irish with Richard The French with the Scots The Scots and the English together to boot the French That's up to about 1500 And on and on and on So who are the English? Your wife should read this book, if she hasn't already, http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000XUAEMG/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?ie=UTF8&btkr=1

Dr. Pepper with Imperial cane sugar

The current Crown Prince, with luck, will be out-lived by his mother, thereby skipping a generation.Yeah,.but what are the odds of that happening? Probably less than a Jacobite being restored.What is he 65 now? I think we are looking at, at least, 20 years of Charles III. Charles is 67. The woman of the House of Windsor tend to live very long lives (Queen Victoria (82 YOA), Charles Maternal Grandmother lived until age 101 for example). the men do not (eg. Charles Grandfather died at 57) I think HRH POW favors his father Phillip Mountbatten, (House of Glucksburg) more. He must be close to 90 too, and is looking pretty darn good. CIII could have a long reign. He is probably going to be in his 70s before starts. Phillip is 94. Reportedly still skirt chasing. What he would do actually do with one if he caught her at his age who knows. He's 94? He looks pretty darn good for 94.

The Duke of Edinburgh is German also.

The current Crown Prince, with luck, will be out-lived by his mother, thereby skipping a generation. Yeah,.but what are the odds of that happening? Probably less than a Jacobite being restored. What is he 65 now? I think we are looking at, at least, 20 years of Charles III. Charles is 67. The woman of the House of Windsor tend to live very long lives (Queen Victoria (82 YOA), Charles Maternal Grandmother lived until age 101 for example). the men do not (eg. Charles Grandfather died at 57) I think HRH POW favors his father Phillip Mountbatten, (House of Glucksburg) more. He must be close to 90 too, and is looking pretty darn good. CIII could have a long reign. He is probably going to be in his 70s before starts.

JB has an eye for the go8d stuff. https://reverb.com/news/the-story-of-amos-joe-bonamassas-58-korina-flying-v

The ' 58 Flying V No. 7 and Number One together.

That is a big bummer. RiP Lonnie

I think those are all points well taken. I think one key issue I overlooked is that his fan base was predominantly female. Apparently, he is one of those artists that one gender "got" and the other didn't. I think if you asked women currently in their mid 40s to 50s what they thought about the news and the amount of coverage the might have an entirely different point of view. That and the "mystery" that is going to exist until an official cause of death is announced will keep the story simmering for awhile. The funeral arrangements will be another component that keeps it swirling.

From your article : "Orthodox JWs Orthodox Canadian JWs are members of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (WTS), an organization founded in Pennsylvania in the 1870s, which now has over six million members worldwide (11). Generally, orthodox JWs seek and accept the benefits of modern medical care with one notable exception: since July 1, 1945, the WTS has held that blood transfusions, even autologous transfusions, violate God’s will." I am pretty sure that echos what I said a few posts above and sure is no where near your assertion that "More orthodox members of his religion will refuse any and all medical treatments." None of those 3 cases in your article involved parents denying their children medical treatment. They were all brought in for medical treatment, and they say the same things to every doctor, "do everything you can, except no blood transfusions." They will refuse any and all transfusions, and, as mentioned in the JAMA article it linked to, it creates a problem in certain cancer treatments that frequently require blood transfusions. Howevet, I have yet to read anything where they are against anesthesia, or pain killers of any kind. They simply are not adverse to medical treatment for themselves ir their children except to when it comes to one thing. Whether that is reasonable, moral, or whatever isn't an appropriate discussion for this forum per the ToS, but I think having the facts corrected about what his faith believes should be.

Alcohol and street drugs would be taboo per his religion. Prescribed painkillers, if involved, probably less taboo.Pain meds wouldn't be taboo at all. The only thing that would be taboo as far as medical treatment would be a blood transfusion.That is not actually correct. More orthodox members of his religion will refuse any and all medical treatments. Court orders have had to be sought here where children under the age of 12 were denied treatment in Alberta by their parents, even in some cases for ailments that can be successfully treated in nearly 100% of the cases.Religion, as Lenin said, is the drug of the masses. That is a total myth and you ate way off base, unless they are completely different in Alberta. Before you embarrass yourself further on this issue I suggest you read the AMA.article that is widely available.You are confusing his religion with Christian Scientists. They undergo heart surgeries,.knee surgeries, every kind of surgery there is available. Procedures were developednin Houston by Debake and Cooley to.allow their children to have open heart surgery without violating their religious convictions. There are even.surgeons who belong to his religion. It is only transfusions that they are against as a universal doctrine. I will see if I can.find the article to post so this misconception doesn't get spread furthwr. Perhaps this artical will enlighten you: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2528596/ Excerpt: "A 2002 Alberta case involved a 16-year-old patient (case 1) with acute myeloid leukemia, subtype M1; she received 38 transfusions under court order before her death (1). A second Alberta case (case 2) in 2003 upheld a court order to transfuse a 16-year-old with dysfunctional menstrual bleeding who required a dilation and curettage (2). In a third case (case 3) in British Columbia in 2005, a judge ordered that a 14-year-old girl with osteogenic sarcoma be transfused if her condition abruptly deteriorated and as adjunct to the oncology treatment, which had a 70% chance of success (3)." The proscribed treatment for Treatment for AML often requires stem cell transplant, chemotherapy, radiation treatment, immunotherapy. Often blood transfusions are also required. The JW parents refused treatment ***of any kind***. By the time the court ruled, the child had deteriored rapidly from her agressive cancer and it was too late to stop and then reverse a fatal decline. Glad you finally got it, they are against transfusions, not medical treatment.

From the New Yorker: "Though [they] accept virtually all other medical interventions, the stricture against transfusion can affect their care." http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-jehovahs-witnesses-are-changing-medicine

From the JAMA article I link below. His religion "accepts medical and surgical treatment. In fact, scores of them are physicians, even surgeons." https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/blood/jehovahs-witnesses-the-surgical-ethical-challenge/

Alcohol and street drugs would be taboo per his religion. Prescribed painkillers, if involved, probably less taboo.Pain meds wouldn't be taboo at all. The only thing that would be taboo as far as medical treatment would be a blood transfusion. That is not actually correct. More orthodox members of his religion will refuse any and all medical treatments. Court orders have had to be sought here where children under the age of 12 were denied treatment in Alberta by their parents, even in some cases for ailments that can be successfully treated in nearly 100% of the cases. Religion, as Lenin said, is the drug of the masses. That is a total myth and you ate way off base, unless they are completely different in Alberta. Before you embarrass yourself further on this issue I suggest you read the AMA.article that is widely available. You are confusing his religion with Christian Scientists. They undergo heart surgeries,.knee surgeries, every kind of surgery there is available. Procedures were developednin Houston by Debake and Cooley to.allow their children to have open heart surgery without violating their religious convictions. There are even.surgeons who belong to his religion. It is only transfusions that they are against as a universal doctrine. I will see if I can.find the article to post so this misconception doesn't get spread furthwr.

The current Crown Prince, with luck, will be out-lived by his mother, thereby skipping a generation. Yeah,.but what are the odds of that happening? Probably less than a Jacobite being restored. What is he 65 now? I think we are looking at, at least, 20 years of Charles III.

Sigh. OK, you made me look. You learn this stuff when you buy Land.Rovers, Barbour jackets and Turnbill and Asher shirts.