 | | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice... who cares!
|
|
(...) assumptions (IE 'are you still beating your wife' type questions)... and given that you HAD to answer ALL the questions, it was rather tricky to figure out what the heck to answer. Would I rather be/meet my favorite footballer? (I don't have a (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) You are correct that independent corroboration is vital in verifying scientific observation. It is to the serious discredit of the "gay scientist" that no one else has made an equivalent finding, so we are better off suspending final judgment (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
This seems like as good a place as any to jump in. The research i've done shows that a gay scientist found evidence of a gay gene, but no one has been able to duplicate his results. In scientific research, that is a very serious thing. It may have (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Gay-o-meter (Was Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice... who cares!)
|
|
(...) meter told me to "Loosen up mate, Women like softer edges" or some such. Which is ironic, since most women consider me rather sensitive. I dunno. ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) Gotta agree with Chris - the desperation seems a bit more on the other side. (...) A propensity for "gayness" may be in someone's gene, it may not. I don't discount it, but I don't accept it out of hand, either. I've been more of the opinion (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice... who cares!
|
|
(...) I did not mean to imply it would change your sexulaity. :) (...) I'm one of those cynics that thinks big homophobes have something to hide... :) Fun aside, the test illustrates a simple, but often overlooked, point: there are more than three (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice... who cares!
|
|
(...) Why would you advise this? It's obviously a silly thing. I mean, it's cute and aparently I'm 35% gay, but I don't think it has any bearing on anything. I don't get your need to consult...what's the deal with that? Chris (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice... who cares!
|
|
What does it really matter? If people are happy that is a good thing. There was recently a "gay census" in the UK. It has been criticised for focusing on people who are "out", but it is still the most detailed revue of gay life in the UK. The main (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) There is a lot of talk in our media too. Most of it about foreign nationals living here planning acts in 3rd countries. They all seem top overlook the possibility that UK nationals may wish to plant bombs also... Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) Good questions. What is good about a time limit is that it will quickly remove "knee jerk" legislation. It will also should force bad legislation to be re-debated & perhaps modified/repealed. (...) Talking of your government, I heard that you (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) I have to say that that strikes me as a fundamentally selfish view. Repugnant as it may seem, I'm sure there would have been those who yesterday said of Israel "They'll understand now". When Israel retaliates, will they say, “They'll (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
My my. It is not often we see posts highligted here, you appear to have struck a chord with readers. I agree with a great deal of what you have said. However I think the genie is already out of the bottle on a number issues. (...) Why restrict (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: **snip of lots of sensible things** I hate to post a "me too," but Chris and I are so seldom in 100% agreement that I thought it was worth mentioning. Bravo to you, Chris, for a (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) That's why they should all be in Burkhas. ;-) Chris (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
As far as i am concerned, the whole deate is moot. Not only that, but it is dangerous because of its potential impact on society. Also, the way the various quotes describe homosexuality leave the issue somewhat clouded. As i see it: - (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
As Chris alluded to, homosexuality falls under the realm of behavioral genetics and is probably an epigenetic process (e.g. acting above the level of the genes). Epigenetic processes are incredibally difficult to tease apart and complex ones such as (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) website. 'Cause we just don't have enough trouble of our own? ;-) (...) How can a question be logical or not? (...) I think you are looking through a tinted lense. It seems like a pretty evenhanded treatment to me. (...) You and this hound (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
(...) I would not necessarily assume you were anti-gay, although I might assume your stance is based primarily on belief rather than logic. (...) Well, here's the thing that gets me. I've never seen anyone give a convincing reason why anyone would (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | gay by birth vs. gay by choice
|
|
the following is a question and answer excerpt from a debate on another website. The questions seem to me very clear and logical. The answers, however, do not; sometimes they seem rather desperate. I find it very interesting that the person (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) Some people were already agitating for the freeing of slaves. The southern states would not accept such a change to their economy. I am pretty sure slaves were understood to be individuals with rights, denied them or not, what was asserted (...) (23 years ago, 3-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) I disagree. Two hundred years ago, as now, the rights of the individual *were* paramount, but the definition of individual was very different and was suited to the demands of the time. Would slave-dependent states have signed the Constitution (...) (23 years ago, 2-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
Ob. Lego: Yes, you should rush out and read Louis Sullivan's essay "The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered"! and then go build! Also interesting: his _Autobiography of an Idea_ and _System of Ornament_. (23 years ago, 1-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
Speaking of reading, I suggest the anthology _An American Primer_ (Daniel J. Boorstin) for basic readings. Want Washington's Inaugral Address (to Congress) and Farewell Address? Jefferson's? John Adams' "What do we mean by the American Revolution?" (...) (23 years ago, 1-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Ack, I deleted the subject line without having a good replacement.
|
|
(...) Sorry, but this made me arrrrggh: "more omnipresent". "Omni-" means "all," making it redundant. Of course, *I* knew what you meant, but I'm just an omnidork. (...) Unfortunately we're still in the mindset of "with enough safeguards we can (...) (23 years ago, 1-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) Well, if they were alive today -- I'd kiss Thomas Jefferson, shake hands with guys like Madison and Jay, and kick Hamilton in the pain zone (::sigh:: if only Burr had killed him sooner =oP). No arguments over the value of the Declaration, it (...) (23 years ago, 1-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
Hi Richard! (...) *Actually*, to be fair, the "American Way" as you define it is *much* more omnipresent in the Declaration of Independence than in the Constitution. By *far*. Read it and weep, bro - and while you're at it, get a copy of the (...) (23 years ago, 1-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) The one in which the rights of the individual is ideally paramount. The one that enumerated those rights both in the body of the U.S. Constitution (basically a summary what the individual could expect the representative govt. to look and act (...) (23 years ago, 1-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate) !
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
Hi John! First off, let me say - I hear you. I know what you're talking about (*and* Chris is right - you're speaking to the wrong crowd, people on lugnet are generally not crowd-followers(1)). I've seen it happen too as I was watching CNN lately. (...) (23 years ago, 1-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) I suppose no sane courts would extradite without sound evidence. But even with sound evidence, it is a violation of basic principles of right to extradite suspects to a country in which they may face an "improper" justice. The recent events (...) (23 years ago, 1-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) The good parts, of course. Unequal sufferage of the law was (and still is) a problem with the implementation of 'The American Way' not a flaw in it. We should keep working to improve our inclusion of all people. I don't seek to replicate the (...) (23 years ago, 1-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
I'm replying to bits of John's post as well as Chris'. (...) I think I understand your intended point here, but the notion that The American Way should be what it was 200 years ago is baseless and anachronistic. The American Way of 200 years ago was (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) the (...) the (...) have (...) months. And who will be in government when the time limit arrives? What's the chances they'll vote to extend it? (...) Our government passed an equally stupid bill regarding asylum seekers recently (with the help (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Whatever
|
|
Hello Larry, it was sad for me to see things escalate in this way. I have by far not seen Scott as negative as you did, even saw some valid points in his posts. But then, being German, I may not be able to read between the lines as much as you do. I (...) (23 years ago, 29-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) You mean over the past hundred years? It seems to me that today is the natural evolution of a hundred years of incrementally giving up the American way. (...) Yeah. From my informal discussion over the past two months, most people don't really (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) It should be noted that ->people<- of the United States rejected the current guy residing in the White House. The joke was that as soon as Dubya got power, his first words would be, "Let the executions begin." (...) CNN: America's New (and (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) I think EU countries do not extradite where there is a chance of a death penalty anyway? ...perhaps OBL should come live in the EU? That aside, your point is an interesting one. Most of the new legislation allows for situations where there is (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) Although our plight is not as bad as elsewhere, I'm certainty not happy with the legislation we are rushing through right now. A few hours is being spent setting aside laws which have worked well for >500 years. By Xmas the UK will have laws (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
(...) For what it's worth, Norwegian courts can probably not extradite a suspected terrorist to USA anymore. This is due to the fact that they can stand a chance of being convicted by rules which are in conflict with basic international principles (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die
|
|
(...) 4|\||) fr33|)0|\/| 0f 7yp1|\|9! (Perhaps the point has been taken a bit far now...) Fredrik (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The *real* Phantom Menace and the fall of the republic
|
|
Hi all, I have been observing recent events in the world, and i just have to say, the governments in some of the major western powers (UK, Canada, and especially the US)have lost their marbles completely. Most other parts of Europe seem to have (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) Or... Class....class.....SHUT UP!!!!!!! <thank you> Anyone spot *that* one? -John FUT .fun (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) You got it, Toyota: (URL) (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping our children safe
|
|
(...) <snip> Sad thing is, your demands are perfectly logical extensions of this kind of liberal, feel good, I'm okay, you're okay, no judgment insanity.... -(name withheld by request, lest anyone use it to harrass[1] me) [1] pronounced "Ha- rass", (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping our children safe
|
|
"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:GnIpI1.3Fo@lugnet.com... (...) And the rest aren't? (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die
|
|
(...) Haven't you heard? l33t-bonics is a language now! It's per-teck-ted! I m hear 4 u! *Shudder*. I feel so dirty having typed that. best LFB, Defender of the Sacred Cow^H^H^H Orthodoxy (23 years ago, 29-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die
|
|
(...) Please do so, but understand that Tore is exactly correct in urging you to direct your postings to their proper groups. Despite what some may think, LUGNET is not a homogeneous and publicly-owned forum; it is private property, and those who (...) (23 years ago, 29-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die
|
|
in article GnKBvv.3nA@lugnet.com, Austin Greenwood at sonyplaystationgames...otmail.com wrote on 11/29/01 6:55 AM: (...) And freedum uv speling. (23 years ago, 29-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Scott and Larry Show: Call for a Series Finale
|
|
(...) But for me, it was out of the clear blue sky... that is my point. Like I said, I was "surprised". I still can't understand why he got uptight about calling the e-mail "junk mail". Bet let's not go over all that again... (...) Noted. (...) Did (...) (23 years ago, 29-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," the quote goes. We probably agree that you are frequently sharing your opinions on the (mis-)behavior of other people here. If you want some credibility with regards to your opinions on other (...) (23 years ago, 29-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die
|
|
All i can say is i will continue to exercise freedom of speach. (...) (23 years ago, 29-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) ?????? I thought it was Life of Brian????? ROSCO (23 years ago, 29-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) Sorry, I didn't mean shouting, per se, but that it is possible to fight noise by reasoning with the person making the noise. (...) I have participated actively in calls for banishment regarding multiple people on LUGNET. But, the cases I have (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) Oklahoma! Oklahoma! Oklahoma! Oklahoma! Oklahoma! *bangs pot* ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) Sorry, I don't think I understand what you mean by this. Do you mean that you can make Scott go away by shouting at him? Please have me excused if that was not what you meant, as I'm unsure about your allegory. (...) Thankfully, the overall (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) Not to mention the people making fun of people adding to the noise by telling people to quit making noise about noise. :-) "And their father's father's fathers!" (Spot the movie reference!) Fredrik (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) Quiet down! I can't hear myself think! (I want some grey tiles) That's *better*. DaveE FUT fun (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
in article GnIq4K.5L2@lugnet.com, John Neal at John@TCLTC.org wrote on 11/28/01 10:07 AM: (...) I suppose...does that mean the hand of God? Rob (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
in article sandlin-49DB89.07353...ugnet.com, Mark Sandlin at sandlin@nwlink.com wrote on 11/28/01 9:35 AM: (...) Oh, *do* be quiet... 8) Rob (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
"Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message news:GnIMuw.Hwo@lugnet.com... (...) start (...) fuel. D'oh! :-) (...) your (...) people, (...) Ayup. -Tim (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) Of course, but your analogy fails because the point of a controlled burn is to eliminate potential fuel, while verbal outbursts provide additional fuel. (...) And, to be fair, the calls for banishment have been directed at specific individuals (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Scott and Larry Show: Call for a Series Finale
|
|
(...) Yes you could have. If it had been out of the clear blue sky, then mixing it up in a bit of a brawl would have been appropriate. Due to your special relationship with Larry, letting it go would have been. (...) Please note that I really (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Scott and Larry Show: Call for a Series Finale
|
|
(...) No. Larry was being strange over the weekend. I was genuinely surprised by some of what he was posting. I could not let is slide. (...) Chris, I try my best to be good. I try not to prod until I am prodded. There are all sorts of things which (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) You mean the "HOG" :-) -John (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping our children safe
|
|
(...) This one was silly Dave! Chris (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) *KKKKeeeeerrrrsssssh...FFzzzzZZZ* ---SteveR (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Keeping our children safe
|
|
(URL) US citizens are apparently entitled to have their personal views established as national policy, here are a few changes I'm going to demand: Essays on "How I Spent My Summer Vacation" must be outlawed Teachers are forbidden to ask "How are you (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) What's really funny is people adding to the noise by telling people to quit making noise about noise. :^D ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is this a good way to make money?
|
|
(...) I don't know the historical reason for the name satanism. The main point of the ideology was to be an alternative to christianity. While in christianity you should compromise in this life, awaiting a better afterlife, satanists took the (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
"Fredrik Glöckner" <fredrik.glockner@bio.uio.no> wrote in message news:qrd667vdznp.fsf....uio.no... (...) Can you successfully fight fire with a well-timed, controlled fire you start yourself? (...) Before saying 'fairly frequently,' I'd certainly (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is this a good way to make money?
|
|
in article qrd4rnfmcjd.fsf@eos.uio.no, Fredrik Glöckner at fredrik.glockner@bio.uio.no wrote on 11/28/01 4:10 AM: (...) IF that's the way it came about (and I am in no way certain it is accurate), I would have said they could have done a better job (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
in article GnHDvJ.Dw9@lugnet.com, John Neal at John@TCLTC.org wrote on 11/27/01 4:45 PM: (...) Maybe we need lugnet.lego.religion.debate; "Doe the HAND exist, or not?" 8) Rob (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) My post is directed at the reply: (...) By this comment is it safe to say that you feel historical weapons and any death they caused are acceptable, but any in our "current time" are not? Weapons are an unavoidable part of our history and our (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is this a good way to make money?
|
|
(...) The satanism concept is, BTW, hugely misunderstood. In it's original form, it has nothing to do with worshipping the devil. The satanism concept was originally thought of as the "opposite" of christianity. Satanists did not believe there was a (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Is this a good way to make money?
|
|
Hey Y'all: There I was, fretting over my flu and lazing on the couch with a sleazy novel, when this program comes on television (sometimes I leave it on as background noise) that's all about this huge satanist conspiracy beginning with Aleister (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) So your noble intent is what permits you to add even more noise to the discussion? Does this work, BTW? Can you successfully fight noise with noise? (...) You are fairly frequently asking for the banning of people. You are also frequently (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) I suppose you could do a 1x1 cone with an antenna piece through the middle -- you know, that ubiquitous 9-mm discarding sabot round for maximum penetrating power. :-, Cheers, - jsproat (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) Well, you could probably model more standard ammo with just 1x1 rounds (pun not intended!) - the stud would give the appearance of a "round" tip...use grey for the bullet & colour of your choice for the casing. ROSCO (couldn't figure out where (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) But that's just plain funny - what other sort of 1x1 cone is there? Cheers Richie Dulin (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) hehe I was wondering how the issue of juniorization would lead to a religious debate.... "If a loving God exists, why would He allow juniorization?", or using clones as proof for the existence of Satan....:-) -John <straying towards o.t.fun> (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) Not really-- but there's numerous places to have that debate. lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.harrypotter, etc. Depends on who you're interested in debating, and which particulars you're debating. Juniorization in general? I'd throw (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) Okay, please don't take offence, but where is one to start a discussion on the topic: "LEGO juniorization: Good or Bad"? I know it is not supposed to be here (off-offtopic as it is), but There is no Lugnet.On-topic.debate, is there? I want to (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Scott and Larry Show: Call for a Series Finale
|
|
(...) [snip] (...) Yes!!!...!!! YES-YES-YES-YES-YES-...ES-YES-YES -YES-YES-YES-YES-YES...YES-YES-YE S-YES-YES-YES-YES-YE...-YES-YES-Y ES-YES-YES-YES-YES-Y...S-YES-YES- YES-YES! Just like Larry should fail to be baited by your antics. (...) We are (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) Ah, OK...sorry...you're right! Man. Talking to people about (or not about!) Lego is so, so much harder than just playing with Lego. I think I'll stick to the latter, and leave Hell to the demons. --Dave (jot and jab) xxx...xxx (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) I'm still kind of confused. I think you're missing a bit of the semantic language in what was said--he's implying that though his Beretta is the vehicle that piqued people's interest in LEGO anew, they've come here and seen *everything*, and (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No thank you!
|
|
(...) Where did I say that I "did not want to receive the material"? You asked if I was too lazy to unsubscribe. I said "no". Can you not join the dots together? Scott A (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Apology.
|
|
Larry, You invade my privacy. You act on my behalf without my permission. You then, to top it all off, dress insults and weasel words up as an apology. What is one to think of you? Do you have no self respect? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) But do these themes not represent the battle of "Good" against "Bad" in a simple way? I'm not sure a *model* gun does that? Jeff's gun is a model *not* a toy. As a model it is great. It is impressive. However, I don't want one. What affirmed (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) (URL) Lego didn't really "approve", they just gave the artist permission to use the logo before realizing exactly what the project was going to be. Apparently he approached them about modelling a "hospital" initially for an artistic piece he (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
Hello, "David Eaton" <deaton@intdata.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:GnH008.J1L@lugnet.com... (...) do (...) do, (...) Sorry .. i think you might understand I can't catch everything what someone might ever have built. I am interested in that one. (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) heh, i have it bookmarked for just the same reason. :) Along with Dave Eaton's little piano, go figure :) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) Isn't the idea of non-violent toys that we don't encourage the IDEA of violence? I mean, isn't an A-Bomb a historical weapon? Is that ok for a toy? How about a medieval torture chamber? At what point in history or fiction does a weapon (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) He didn't build a weapon, as far as I can tell. He build a MODEL of one. Big difference. If he built an all plastic, working, lethal hand gun that could be assembled and disassembled from easily obtainable parts, you'd have a point. Something (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) Yeah yeah, tanks rule. Huhuhuhuhu, hehehe, huhuhu. Tanks are cool. Needless to say I also enjoy tanks, aircraft, in fact any kind of cool machinery, even gun mechanisms, just so long as I am not on the receiving end. If this makes me a nutter (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) I don't think a single AFOL's model represents the entire AFOL community, do you? I don't think people are going to look at a Lego gun and say "Gee, if *that's* what adults do with Lego, they shouldn't have it!". And if they do, they can live (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) I think the romanticism of violence implicit in Pirate, Castle, Wild West, and Adventurers is far worse than the desire to make as accurate as possible a model of something which happens to be a weapon, though I obviously don't actually think (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) really? how do you figure? or was that sarcasm? if so, it doesn't refute my argument... (...) something like town? with bank robbers, police officers? All armed, by the way. (...) you maybe didn't tell him how to play, but you did tell him to (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
"Dan Boger" <dan@peeron.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:200111271500.fA...ldomain... (...) Yeah. An a-bomb can too... (...) more (...) These are all fictional or historical themes as you may have noticed. Show me a LEGO theme that plays in our (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) (I'll be the one to break the news) Nope. Frank loses. Mentioning LEGO in this NG is akin to mentioning "he who must not be named" (and I don't mean Voldemort.... you, know, what's his name.... okay, Hitler....D'oh!) (...) Well, don't come (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) that is (...) would (...) not a (...) yah, I would be one of those people. I am also pro gun control, and yet I believe that it's not guns who kill, it's people. A gun can be used to protect, and save lives. (...) so no more pirate ships, (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
|
(...) (again, i say this as a big gun control advocate) I believe many people would argue with you here. I know many gun collectors who own beretta's, and not a single one of them has killed any humans. (...) Sproat already said it, but it's worth (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
