 | | All Your al-Qaida Are Belong To U.S. !!
|
|
As tomorrow is September 11th, I thought it might be appropriate to post this... (URL) a link to a Flash cartoon I made last year, a month or so after 9-11. I thought I'd mark the one-year anniversary of the event with a little humor. Laughter is (...) (22 years ago, 11-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Purchases: 100 lb too small
|
|
(...) That's cool. I should include that Silly Putty is what it is after Binney-Smith packages it. Dow calls it 3179 Dilatant Compound. (22 years ago, 11-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) "Reverse Discrimination": A politically correct term for the right wing meant to really say, "We done stole it fair and square, so no trying to redress the crime." ;-) Actually, I don't see how "reverse discrimination" applies here whatever (...) (22 years ago, 11-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) I never suggested otherwise. They acknowledged the existence of God without necessarily endorsing a particular brand of religion's understanding of Him. -John (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) And some would call that 'reverse discrimination' Just because a group of students has a student run group and they want to discuss their belief in God, and they can't get school support on par with students who want to have a Camera club, (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) The Founding Fathers were deists, not theists. They believed in a Creator, not the xian god. --Bill. (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) I have no problem with people believing in whatever religion they want. However, when the State, through the public school system, offers *financial* support for an institution of religion, then that crosses the line. The Bible Club should be (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Purchases: 100 lb too small
|
|
(...) We did that about 10 years ago when I was working at Apple. Our whole department went in on a bulk purchase of Silly Putty. --Bill. (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Purchases: 100 lb too small
|
|
(...) Heh. This is particularly amusing to me, as I work at the other end of the line. If I had a window, I could look at the production tanks that Dow uses as temporary storage before loading and shipping. 100 lbs isn't just small, it's negligable. (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Cool looking clone on Ebay
|
|
(...) Yeah, I don't know about those prices without knowing more about the quality. Plus the shipping from Hong Kong or whatever is going to just suck. I have the feeling we may see these sets somewhere in the Americas before too much longer. -- (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Bulk Purchases: 100 lb too small
|
|
The "funny" column of the WSJ today (9/10/02) tells how Adult Fans of Silly Putty organized bulk purchases and annoyed Dow Chemical with small 100lb orders. "Ten pounds is bigger than your head" says Jeff Kivert. But fans express frustration with (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Test
|
|
Just testing to see if i can post ok. Hasta La Vista, Sean (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.test)
|
| |
| | Re: Cool looking clone on Ebay
|
|
(...) (URL) It appears that the seller has saturated the market! Anyone who's interested should probably wait a few weeks to see if he re-lists any of the sets for considerably less $$. I have the Tank and the Police Copter on the way, and I'll give (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) Hooray--we agree! That's been my intended point all along, in both this exchange and in the previous debate a month or so ago! I absolutely, totally, completely, and unequivocally support your right to religious freedom and freedom of speech! (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) My point is that it is okay to protect *all* matters of freedom of religious expression up and until people fly planes into buildings... k, that was a little far--my personal philosophy has *always* been that anyone can believe what they want (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) As long as you understand that "Young Hedonists for Satan" has the same rights of access and same protection under the law... Brucifer Devil's Advocate for the Day :-) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Re: The ballets are in.. attn: Daniel
|
|
(...) Nothing wrong with that - as long as the shirt is inside out! G. (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) When you adequately explain from where our government claims our rights originate, then we can talk about the constitutionality of "God language". -John (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) If "apples" = "why does the State in one case have the right to endorse or restrict religion" and "oranges" = "why does the State not have the right to endorse or restrict religion," then I am indeed comparing apples and oranges. What's your (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) Apples and Oranges... In this one, a bonafide extra-curricular school group deserves the same status as any other extracurricular school group. It'd be like saying--'Hey you in the Chess club--we think you're geeky so you don't get any (...) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
