 | | Heres a debate question for ya...
|
|
Sup all debaters... I just have a quick question for all of ya. No offense intended either. What is the point of having debate in a lego forum? I mean, its meant to be a fun place to talk about, um, legos. But, over here ya got your political (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "France is not a Western Country anymore"
|
|
(...) Apparently so. (...) It *seems* like a good idea, it *seems* like it might work. Because all rights are property rights and all that... Okay, so I accidentally kill my neighbour. Darn it, I say. I must make recompense for the killing. Do I (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "France is not a Western Country anymore"
|
|
(...) Nope, are you? (...) I imagined it already, it's ZERO. There is no bureacracy involved.. We said *capitalist*, remember. The market does it for you. I determine a dollar value every time I do a transaction now. Don't you? Or do you buy stuff (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "France is not a Western Country anymore"
|
|
(...) Are you confusing 'capitalist' with 'democratic'? (...) A new dollar value determined every time for every transaction... Imagine the beurocracy behind that! LOL (...) Cheers Richie Dulin (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)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Terry Prosper writes: <snip> (...) I can take much, I can ignore many things, But Terry, You *are* Canadian. You said you have a Canadian passport. Why? Becaouse You *are* Canadian. Your hatred against anything you don't (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
