 | | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) Are you sure that wasn't a guy in Michigan? It made the national news. (25 years ago, 9-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
|
<slrn7oanmg.7jg.cjc@...S.UTK.EDU> <37856F42.4B2DD2B7@voyager.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Apparently so in North Carolina also, at least if children are around (the judge did say the part of (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
|
Mike Stanley wrote: Just teasing here, Mike, mind you, but... (...) the juxtaposition of these two parts of your post made me laugh a bit at the irony. But hey, I don't get out much. For the record I don't think crap is that bad a word any more. Too (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) The only openly hostile comments I've seen so far were directed at you by Ed, and it seems he's claiming those were examples of flippancy, not hostility. Some topics are hot, some people get hot while debating them. I'd like to think I haven't (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) I guess you mean a duplex. Sure, why not? Especially given the current state of the law that makes it so freakin difficult to get rid of losers once you find out they're scummy and you don't want them or their loud, dirty, possibly dangerous (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) Wow, that's really disgusting. I think maybe Denny's watched Roger and Me a few too many times. (25 years ago, 9-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
|
Reply-To: cjc@newsguy.com Message-Id: <slrn7oalrb.7jg.cjc@...S.UTK.EDU> X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.4.3 UNIX) (...) Or people have grown so fed-up with every new property tax increase being touted as "necessary to turn education around" and yet year (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) I don't see how my logic lead to this conclusion. But, I agree that breaking some laws is required to maintain moral purity. Since the US government uses my tax dollars to kill people with whom I have no beef, I do feel kind of sleazy allowing (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
|
Christopher L. Weeks wrote in message <3784F884.EBFE1372@c...ri.edu>... (...) why do (...) Chris, I know we are on the same side and all, but following your moral further, it is also right to break the laws, as you see fit, because it hurts the (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) Statistical studies only support, and can never _prove_ a particular hypothesis. At least if you're rational and believe (generally) that the scientific method is valid. Ed can't possibly prove that, he can only support it with evidence. (25 years ago, 8-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
