 | | Re: Revisionists...
|
|
(...) That whole line of questioning was really impermissable and would not have happened at another time in history. You are talking about a man that lied about having an affair. Why? Because supposedly you can't be president if you inhale or like (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Revisionists...
|
|
(...) If you could take your confrontational partisan hat for just a second and re-read my last post you would see that I was actually criticising Republicans in congress who are currently playing politics as usual, by blocking attempts at an (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
|
|
(...) But, see -- I don't agree with him either. And the gun, operating as an equalizer, puts at least some political power back into the hands of the meek and peace-loving. Now, I am not advocating revolution -- we are yet far from that I hope (and (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
|
|
(...) Lots of things can kill you -- like automobiles for example. We keep dangerous things around because they are useful -- like automobiles for example. People can be taught to use dangerous yet useful things without harm to anyone, or at least (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) What it does do is reduce the number of fatalities/injuries from bullets. Dave K (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to start a fire.
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) I think, at least for me, and I believe I've heard others describe it this way--like when Kennedy got shot, when the Apollo 1 caught fire, when the Challenger blew up, and (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to start a fire.
|
|
(...) No an unrelated wrong does not justify the other. However it is receiving undue attention when there are larger concerns to worry about. Much like I can not figure out why everyone made such a big deal about the space shuttle accident. Far (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to start a fire.
|
|
(...) So, an unrelated wrong justifies the other. Nonsense. Nor is the "wrong" proven, just your opinion. (...) Why? -->Bruce<-- (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to start a fire.
|
|
(...) No I think he took it exactly as I intended. Along the lines of "why are people making such a fuss over this when there are far worse evils to be stopping first." Also you might want to read: (URL) Petrucelli (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
|
|
(...) Yes, but gun control does not reduce crime either. (...) If they could stop it through sustained military action, why didn't they? (...) Then the Government must have done something really stupid (...) Make a choice? (...) Yeah I would say (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to start a fire.
|
|
(...) Going on the assumption that abortion = murder, your argument is that an unconnected wrong justifies another. This requires that you prove any abortion = murder without condition (not to mention you are still saddled with proving one wrong (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to start a fire.
|
|
(...) Yes. I also have no problem with someone taking the "after morning" pill within the first 2 weeks. (If someone waits longer than that it is their choice and they should deal with the consequeces of their choice.) (...) It is a trailing (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
|
|
(...) Well, okay. Are you hereby abandoning your previous arguments, in which you've asserted that increased gun control breeds increased crime? I just want to be clear on this. (...) Right, but is it a sustained military action (a la Desert Storm (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to start a fire.
|
|
(...) So you're in favor of embryonic stem-cell research? That's a tangential point (purely for my own curiosity) but it meshes nicely with your overall argument. Anyway, why is a heartbeat the deciding factor? What distinct difference exists (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
|
|
(...) That is pretty much what I just said. (...) Well the Israelis are using tanks and helicopters. (...) No, the constitution allows the government to call on the people when neccessary. (...) So? (...) Nukes are overrated. One of those defense (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to start a fire.
|
|
(...) Once the cell mass has a heartbeat (which occurs after about 21 days) it is distinctly human. Prior to that the cell mass could technically become anything. (...) Maybe a DNA expert but it would be tough. (...) By your definition, not mine. (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to start a fire.
|
|
(...) I think that's what you'd end up debating, unless you're trying to create or debate law which defines the "acceptable" point for an abortion to take place. Then you'd argue the points you brought up. In general, I think the issue that (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to start a fire.
|
|
(...) True enough. I'm taking it as an abortion debate separate from the Iraq debate. (...) I don't accept "person potential" because, with the advent of cloning, most cells in your body have "person potential." It is not slippery slope reasoning to (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
|
|
(...) Heh. Our last gun control exchange ended with us becoming pals. Who knows what would happen next? You're 100% correct that my examples were anecdotal, which was kind of my point, too. You're also right that a quantity of rifles makes a (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to start a fire.
|
|
(...) Who determines when it's discernably human? If I put a 64-cell embryo on your desk, would you be able to tell me that it's human? Who do you identify as a credible authority on determining humanness? By pre-brain-functional, I refer to brains (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
