Take a story with attention-getting factoids involved. Provide a fluff report which amounts to little more than tsk...tsk...tsk... Don't go to the trouble of researching the issue in order to provide useful information regarding the prevalence of such suicides and how often sexting has anything to do with them. Especially don't provide useful information regarding how to prevent teenage suicide or what friends and family members might do to prevent it and, especially, to take action when someone might be contemplating it (if you were successful at preventing teen suicides, this whole juicy class of stories would DISAPPEAR!).

Program the public to have their attention grabbed by your next tragic story along the same lines. Lather, rinse, repeat,... repeat,... repeat,...

Such stories are not designed to have any but the completely self-serving purpose (on the part of the MSM) to exploit human tragedy in order grab attention and sell advertising.

The MSM, itself, has become nothing more than attention whores who pimp themselves out and sell their souls for the purpose of making maximum money. They should be ashamed, but, sadly, they've long since left shame behind (along with their integrity).

We can only hope that folks will seek out better, more accurate, more useful information than the MSM provides. Only by demanding such will we escape from the swill that's now identified as MSM "news" but only exists because it can be used to convince us to watch ads.

And needs extensive research to find the most effective ways to minimizing its air, land, and water polluting effects. The truly stupid misstep by these Republicans, however, is that the RED states, where their only remaining base generally lives, are far less regulated in these matters than the blue states.

Many of their "base" would love not to be suffering from the effects of the massive factory livestock operations in their neighborhoods - would love not to be gasping at the smell of the huge pork finishing operation five miles away from where they live. For those folks, this particular "earmark" seems like money likely to be VERY well spent.

Yes there is a term that is universally used to shame other adolescent boys, especially in socially conservative areas. Socially bullying a guy by derisively calling him a "fag," especially if the boy is less than totally macho in his mannerisms and/or unsure of his sexual orientation is at least as shaming as calling a girl a "slut" or a whore" and every bit if not more likely to increase the risk of suicide in that boy.

For instance, the real question of human cloning is... will a cloned version of you, even if it could be invested with the exact contents of your brain, a la "Freejack" still be you? In other words, would God invest your clone with the same spirit/soul that IS you? Would that keep your soul on earth for another lifetime instead of it's proceeding to the next life?

Or would God invest a cloned version of yourself, even invested with your exact memories, with a soul at all, since that clone would be a human creation rather than a creation of God, or would that cloned "you" be "soulless?" The fictional (but inspired?) depictions of such creatures are not pretty.

Then, again, if human clones don't receive souls, are they really human or is a living breathing human body without a soul nothing more than a collection of cells? Would such a soulless body even be able to attain consciousness?

If your clone receives a new soul different from yours, it will be influenced in very different directions than you were by your own soul so it may not be anything like you despite having identical genetics (as is the case with some identical twins).

In other words, why make a clone of yourself if it can't be... YOU?

No doubt there will, some day, need to be international laws regarding how to deal with human clones and how "human" they really are in the eyes of the law.

Of course if God is totally opposed to such cloning, no doubt God will make it impossible to accomplish (God could do that, couldn't God?).