To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *20466 (-20)
  Re: Welcome Worn Out
 
(...) However it should be pointed out that we are neither a guest nor a neighbor. We seem to be taking on more of the role of parent (not a role I wanted the US to take on but by golly, once the war was started, there was no avoiding it), and a (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "France is not a Western Country anymore"
 
(...) Capitalist governments, *by definition*, don't just "happen" to get into power, and the process of assigning dollar values is not random, capricious, unappealable, or unchanging. Given those clarifications... yes, in my view, it is OK for such (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) The preamble has no force in law, it is used only as support for interpretting the intent of the legislators. This is similar to how the titles of particular statutes are handled. And if you think the word "defense" means invading a non-nuke (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community)
 
(...) //...// (...) Excuse me, sir! I agree to most of the things you say, but what is this mixing of politics and religion? Do you really think that being left-winged is equal to being an atheist or what? /Tore A Christian, anti-liberal and (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "France is not a Western Country anymore"
 
(...) Why would sarcasm be a reason *not* to take a comment seriously? (...) But it's okay simply declare that all rights are property rights and assign a dollar value for all transgressions, just because a capitalist government* happens to get into (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Language
 
Hi, I've recently seen some swearing in the posts here. I'd rather not, so please try to remain cool. thanks. -Suz Suzanne Rich Green LUGNET Admin (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) How about right in the preamble, "provide for the common defense", or how about "secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our prosperity". Bush has his justifications, even if you don't trust in them. You want to talk about (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) If the justification is there it is implicit, not explicit. Pedro (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) his >motivations for those actions or not. (...) "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) Could you show me where in the federal Constitution the invasion of foreign territories is explicitly laid out as part of the duties of the U.S. President? I must have missed that day in civics class... Pathetic republican apologists unite! -- (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community)
 
(...) OK. I usually don't get into debate, but this isn't the place to talk about religous beleifs. I'm glad you have an opinion, but I for one, am 14 years old and have been an official member of my church for a year now. I don't have a problem (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) A-ha! If *I* did send a windfall your way, no way would I take credit-- I'd sign the card "from God, to Dave!" :-) (...) Whoa, you lost me. Are you saying that it is possible for an Atheist to accept the existence of a God? (...) Thank you. I (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) Let's go ahead and ignore all the sweeping support GWB received in the state of Texas, and talk just about his tenure as president. I would say successfully launching campaigns to remove both the Taliban and Husein regime from power was a (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) Not an intentional one. I just meant that any powerful being, like Bill Gates or Ashley Judd, could appear before me and make claims of divinity. But I'd need to see/experience convincing evidence (even if it's accessible only to me) before I (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) <snipped stuff with which I am not necessarily in disagreement> (...) "convincing case" Do I detect a caveat? (...) lol An example of a "convincing case"? So what if after having read this, I, being a Christian man of substantial means (though (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) Your response is a tired joke in this case -- I think that Shrub's lack of ability in most areas of his past life show he is not trustworthy. What members of his cabinet do in his name shows me he is not trustworthy (Ashcroft re: Patriot Act). (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) Of course. Guantánamo is still Cuba ;-) Pedro (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) Unless you're an Arab, or have an Arab-sounding name, or have been to an Arabic nation recently, or know someone who fits any of the above criteria. Then you can be held indefinitely as an "enemy combatant," and no presumption of innocence (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) You could just ask me two different times... 8^) Anyway, you've given a nice summary of the problem of Revelation as evidence. Well said. (...) To let you (and myself) somewhat off the hook--part of my hypothetical situation was that Jesus (...) (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: WMD, again...
 
(...) Last time I checked one was *presumed* innocent until proven guilty in this country. JOHN (21 years ago, 21-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR