tsdlts

"I don't think it's even relevant that it was not legal at the time".

Imagine setting the precedent that the government can unilaterally decide to steal your property based on something your great grandfather did which wasn't even a crime. Do you not see how such a power might be abused in future when you can retroactively punish people for laws where the ink has yet to dry and that they never even committed?

Should we apply this same rule to the NYT's article on Trump's tax returns? They never proved authenticity other than to say that they had "an anonymous source." It seems one group of people are completely fine with accepting the NYT article on faith, but dismiss the New York Post article as obviously fabricated.

This is really interesting. Does anyone know of any other instances of behavioral traits having a direct link to an animal's appearance?

Agreed entirely. Now all you have to do is convince my team of this without being bombarded with the platitude of "don't reinvent the wheel."