 | | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
|
(...) Great! So now that your country has the benefits of conquest -- wealth and power -- it is possible for it to show the "kinder and gentler" face of colonialism -- the hypocrisy of the congenial tyrant. I'd just like you to know that other (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
Warning, semantic slicing and dicing ahead. :-) (...) I would agree except to say that it should read "is not valid for me" or "I cannot accept it as valid within my framework". I acknowledge that others do find it valid. I judge *them* only on (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) Sure. :) (...) Hmm. Bias is perhaps the wrong term for it - I've never seen you reacting to a christian in a neutral environment, so I can't accurately call it bias, I suppose. More after the definition... (...) Dictionary.com's definition (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok, why such anti-American sentiment? (Was Re: the metric system)
|
|
(...) redneck rut and realize (...) when it comes to this (...) with their stupid (...) so many of their (...) pleases you. Personally, I (...) grew up with it, and i (...) terms of feet and inches (...) Big deal. Anyway, to (...) around in debate. (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) Can we dig into that a bit? What anti-christian bias? :-) Seriously. I'm not biased. At least I don't *think* I am. From this cite: (URL) selected the def I think applies: 2. Usage Problem. a. A preference or an inclination, especially one (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Bang!
|
|
(...) Heh! I really only use it in my signature, since I seldom refer to myself mid-sentence in the 3rd person! Dave! (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) looking for a non-Scientologist. Hmm... Dave! (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) Good example Dave! (1) I'll go a lot farther than that. I wouldn't even think to *ask* such a thing because I understand that it's not appropriate for a club (as a club) to be seen as espousing a particular view. This distinction is totally (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tony Hedglen writes: <snip> I think you're misreading Larry here - although to be fair, Larry does seem to have an anti-christian bias. BUT! That's not what he's saying. He is saying that the club should not *AS A CLUB* (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Lego display fund raiser
|
|
(...) Tony, please allow me to express my perspective, as a disinterested third party: In the above snippet you point out that the church (by definition, I think we'll agree, a religious institution) would like the club (a group of individuals of (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
