I don't wish harm on this woman, but I also don't want to see any more cats get hurt. She needs to be made to understand that what she did was cruel, and if necessary, to understand why cruelty is wrong. I understand these things, so there's no reason that she can't learn the same. Of course, in her case, said learning may involve being trapped in a dark, smelly place.

My father once witnessed a pair of young woman in a restaurant taking turns slapping a little kid. Everybody in the restaurant wanted to do something, but everybody, including my dad, was afraid of getting arrested. Sadly, he wasn't being paranoid. Another time, he witnessed some parents leave two little kids on the side of a busy street while they went through a car wash. This time, he had access to a phone and called the police, but they refused to do anything. They told him that unless the kids got hit by a car, it wasn't their business. Gee, do you think they would have "minded their own business" if he tried to intervene? He would probably have been arrested for interfering with the parents' "rights". Apparently, the US government has a hard time telling the difference between parenthood and child slavery.

This is a great example of punishing good people for evils people's deeds. That's why ephedrine, a chemical found in drugs that help with breathing problems, has been banned in Florida: because SOME people might make methamphetamine out of it. Does it never occur to these lawmakers that by punishing innocent people, they're committing a greater evil than that which they seek to prevent? Following this "logic", the entire human race should be banned because SOME people might do bad things.

This study is a great example of the reverse causation fallacy. It assumes that ugliness magically causes people to commit crimes, rather than reaching the simpler and more obvious conclusion that people's lifestyles can affect their attractiveness. It's like those studies that claim that violent video games magically cause people to commit violent crimes. Luckily, most studies now support the simpler and more obvious solution: violent people are more likely to enjoy violent video games. Sadly, too many politicians remain ignorant of this.

He's not as smart or resourceful as Jason Bourne? Maybe he IS! Maybe he WANTED to get caught! Perhaps it's all part of his master plan.

Ironically, the so-called "Public Council for Morality" doesn't know the difference between morality, of which they clearly have very little, and their own personal preferences. They think that homosexuality is "icky", so they try to eliminate it. Ultimately, it's no different than a dictator banning chocolate simply because he doesn't like it. I'm baffled that such pettiness, when shared by large enough groups, is mistaken for morality.

The molecular structure of a golf ball would most certainly prohibit the occurrence of the physical deformation shown in this motion graphic presentation.

To put it another way: FAKE! FAKE! FAKE!

There's one thing this guide is missing: a guide! Luckily, I recognize most of the ghosts, but I'm not quite sure who the multicolored dude is supposed to be.

I seriously doubt that number is accurate, especially since there's no way of actually knowing that "fact".

He reminds me of Earthman:

http://www.artbreak.com/work/show/186541-earthman-steohawk

I've got a strange idea. What if NOBODY controlled the web? I shall call my new idea FREEDOM!

It's a pretty good message, but hopefully, in real life, you would have access to more relevant information about the ethical choice at hand. Are the aliens on Earth, or are you on their homeworld? Why do you explode when they come into contact with you? Are they aware of this fact? Are they even aware of your presence?

Unfortunately, even if extraterrestrials get the signal, they'll have to fly all the way to Earth to ask us what it means.

Felixthecat is right. 6,000 years ago, people complained about how our society is on the verge of collapse. There have been who have done the same ever since. Here's an interesting article about it:

http://www.anxietyculture.com/antisocial.htm

Another thing, where does the LA Times get off attributing this to the anti-authoritarianism of the 60's? Are they seriously comparing Kanye West to the hippies, who were all about peace and love? Are they suggesting authoritarianism is the solution?

A "study" by 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment? Something tells me that this might actually be a promotional gimmick for some upcoming film about lies.