 | | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Cool! Between "Secular Humanism" and "Nontheist," we have you 50% of the way to reason! 8^) Dave! (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Oh, great. Now I have to watch it twice. Thanks, guys. Dave! (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy Crap! Sacred Cow Makes the Best Hamburger!
|
|
I suppose one could also analyze this from the standpoint of death... Most Likely to Get Roaring Drunk in Valhalla -->Bruce<-- Most Likely to Go to Heaven JOHN Most Likely to Be Reincarnated - Mike Most Likely to Achieve Nirvana -->Bruce<-- (which (...) (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy Crap! Sacred Cow Makes the Best Hamburger!
|
|
Where we find out some odd things about ourselves: Smorgasboard Approach to Religion Award (highest overall percentage of compatiblity) -->Bruce<-- 60% Bah Humbug Award (lowest overall percentage) -- Hop-Frog 45% Most Likely to Sacrifice a Virgin to (...) (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) John, I tried to follow this debate as close as possible...forgive me if I’ve missed something. I agree with your general position that God is unchanging, however as far as I read, you’ve only reffered to the God of the Bible as a God of love. (...) (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) My score, as if it is any surprise. No wonder I have trouble seeing eye to eye with y'all Neo-Pagans;-) 1. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (100%) 2. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (96%) 3. Orthodox Quaker (93%) 4. (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Wow, I out Scientologied you with 39%. How weird is that. -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) That's pretty funny. I consider you largely irrelevant to my life and strong feelings. And indeed, as I thought you might, you are backpedalling -- just not in a way that I find socially acceptable or redeeming. I don't have anything else to (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | In The Neolithic Age
|
|
Then I stripped them, scalp from skull, and my hunting dogs fed full, And their teeth I threaded neatly on a thong; And I wiped my mouth and said, "It is well that they are dead, (URL) For I know my work is right and theirs was wrong."> But my Totem (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
|
|
(...) But the key difference is that I am saying "I accept that the universe may always have existed," rather than "I believe that God has always existed." I offer and accept the universe's existence as a possibility, but I don't put faith in that (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
|
|
(...) Hmmm, sounds convenient (point 2 from point 1) and complicated:-) (...) Yes, I am conceding this from the beginning. (...) My point is that if you hold that the universe always existed, that is a faith statement as much as any about God having (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
|
|
(...) Well, let's disclaim once again that science isn't in the business of proving anything as 100% fact, so I reserve the statement that science will always permit modification to existing theory. Science hasn't yet produced a supernova in the (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
|
|
(...) I have to admit that I am surprised we are even debating this because I thought that there was consensus here. WRT to the origin of the universe, you say that "...we don't have the tools to verify our hypotheses. All in good time." Are those (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Have you ever heard of Marcion, Richard? He was an early heretic who held that the God of Jesus and Yahweh were indeed different Gods entirely. Now, I am no Marcionite, but if I were, wouldn't it be rather intolerant of you to question my (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
|
|
(...) That's called special pleading, and it's a fallacy. It's a double-standard based in circular reasoning and cannot be used in any logically sound argument. (...) Well, that's as much a statement of faith as anything I've heard you make, and it (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
|
|
(...) What I am saying is that this particular question is unique and cannot, by definition, be answered by Science. (...) Science will never come up with the answer period. Any speculation about the origin of the universe is pure flattery. Even if (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Here are my results: 1. Secular Humanism (100%) 2. Unitarian Universalism (96%) 3. Liberal Quakers (83%) 4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (83%) 5. Nontheist (76%) 6. Theravada Buddhism (67%) 7. Neo-Pagan (64%) 8. Christian Science (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Let me phrase it this way: Do you ask questions that, if answered, could cause you to reject your faith as invalid? That is, do you ask the kinds of questions that may require you to abandon your current worldview? If the answer is no, then I (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! And Hoppy thought he was the chief pagan :-)
|
|
(...) LOL Not I, McDuff... Maybe I'll try Taoism. 1. Unitarian Universalism (100%) 2. Secular Humanism (95%) 3. Liberal Quakers (92%) 4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (86%) 5. Neo-Pagan (79%) 6. Theravada Buddhism (78%) 7. Nontheist (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) That test is certainly interesting: 1. Bahá'í Faith (100%) 2. Islam (96%) 3. Orthodox Judaism (96%) 4. Sikhism (94%) 5. Jainism (84%) 6. Reform Judaism (76%) 7. Hinduism (69%) 8. Orthodox Quaker (57%) 9. Mahayana Buddhism (57%) 10. Liberal (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! And Hoppy thought he was the chief pagan :-)
|
|
(...) Haha! That was a great test. I out-neo-paganed the neo-pagan! I see the religion I was initially exposed to (inflicted with?) way down near the bottom. Interesting results. The religion I was initially raised in (inflicted with) is way down (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) I second that. -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Read, learn... again. (URL) -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) This one? 01. Unitarian Universalism (100%) 02. Secular Humanism (96%) 03. Liberal Quakers (88%) 04. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (74%) 05. Nontheist (69%) 06. Theravada Buddhism (69%) 07. Neo-Pagan (62%) 08. Bahá'í Faith (59%) (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: God's Nature
|
|
Well done, Droog! You have slooshed the meaning of my slovos. If you had the cutter and I some pretty polly, we could make a very pleasant nochy of it. The Korova, klootches for a Durango 95, some young devotchkas -- it could be real horrorshow. A (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) I don't see the disagreement here. I think you are saying that you DO allow questions to enter into your faith-schema, and that your faith has so far "survived" (I couldn't think of a better word here) these challenges. I don't think anyone (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
|
|
(...) Science does not pretend to have the answer to the origin of the universe. It has speculation, to be sure, and some ideas on how the creation of the universe progressed. It's one of those questions that we don't see the answer to now, but from (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) I know that you have to believe this, but I have to believe that I have sufficient gas in the tank to make it to the next fueling station. Saying that I have to believe something is basically equivalent to saying I really really really want to (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
|
|
(...) I know this is ploughed ground; I was specifically referring to the creation of the universe. Either God started it, or it simply started itself (neither theory is "scientific") (...) That's 5-0 Vikings to you my friend! Now I must go and (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
|
|
(...) We've been down that road before. Science specifically places no faith in much of anything - not even results, which is why experiments are duplicated to see if the same results are obtained by a different set of senses. New information can (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Slander. I bleed (and bleed, and bleed) Dodger Blue. None of this Angel stuff for me - especially with those red uniforms and "Edison" field. It's The Big A or nothing! (...) Each person must find their own path to God (the truth, philosophy, (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Perhaps I was too light in my characterization. While I think that brother/sister unions are deeply taboo, I also believe that they are pathological, and that their "wrongness" possibly stems from genetics. (...) I have to believe that God is (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) And on this we disagree. Up until now I've been on the side of angels--I mean Bruce and Hoppy. However, faith does not exclude questions. I question everything I am able, and have become quite disenfranchised with 'Religion'. This does not, in (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Good point--let it be thus stipulated. Dave! (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) I must take exception to this hypothetical. It has in no way been shown that atheists have any special attraction towards genocide; whereas by contrast, I have elsewhere shown that people of the many Jewish or Xtian faiths must at least admit (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Yggdrasil's taproots...
|
|
(...) Noooo, incorrect! The Vikings that migrated to Minnesota have set up a new religion that was formally worshipped every Sunday, but due to various schismatic cults (ESPN, FOX, CBS, ABC) now worship occasionally on Saturday, Thursday, and Monday (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: God's Nature
|
|
(...) Whoa! I likewise made reference to A Clockwork Orange just minutes ago. Are we droogs or what?!? Dave! (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) And what are those cultural values based on? The reality of genetic inbreeding, so it kinda loops back on itself. Saying cultural values is saying that it is genetic issues, which is not in the "aside from" column. I think you need to be more (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: God's Nature
|
|
(...) Let's make things nice and sparkling clear shall we? You said: "Our God is not the same God of people who murder women and children in His name. If you call that close-minded, so be it." (URL) I showed that the first statement is false on it's (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Yggdrasil's taproots...
|
|
(...) lol Really? Then you should visit Minnesota sometime;-) Actually, I meant the post Russian revolution USSR (as I'm sure you gathered) JOHN (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Really? So you're not saying that there's an absolute "wrongness" in such a marriage? I confess, that surprises me. And if our culture evolved (despite the best efforts of hardcore traditionalists), then you'd agree that there's nothing (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Then we disagree. (...) Cultural values. (...) As far as we (or they) were able to ascertain God's will. I start from a point that God is Absolute Morality, Absolute Goodness. Any perception of God that is less than that reflects (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) I think that any progression of society necessitates us being on, average, good, or there will be no healthy progression. I have to rely on my fellow person to do the work that I cannot do in (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament: More Laws than You Can Shake a Stick At
|
|
(...) 1. The Israelites were supposed to keep themselves pure. Allowing worshipers of foreign gods to remain alive in their midst would corrupt them and lead them into idolatry. They of course didn't do a very good job of this; otherwise there (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Absolutely, if they're both legally consenting adults. If the problems inherent in genetic problems inbreeding can be overcome, I don't even know why they shouldn't be allowed to have children. Aside from these genetic issues, on what basis (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! Yggdrasil's taproots...
|
|
(...) I couldn't say for sure, but I rather imagine the Rus were followers of the Norse gods. I just can't imagine a bunch of Vikings being secular humanists. :-) -->Bruce<-- League of Green-Eyed Odin's Advocates (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: God's Nature
|
|
(...) Blinkered Bigot! The Bible is not a factual document; it is a book of faith! (...) Hypocrite! Everyone get that? The Bible means whatever (the atheist) Richard Marchetti says it means. (...) The Bible, especially the OT, is anything but (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) No, because his statement is hopelessly vague and unclear. How can you compare a religion with a government? It's apples and oranges. But you are absolutely correct that I believe Christianity is superior to other religions for me. I know (in (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) If I may wager a guess, I would infer that you yourself identify Christianity (specifically, the version to which you adhere) as superior (for you) in some way to all other faiths and non-faiths. If it were not, then why would you follow your (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bush AWOL
|
|
(...) It still worries me that that guy was allowed to fly a plane... Scott A (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: God's Nature
|
|
You're so far gone, there is no way to reply to that. No matter what I might state next you will insist that you can "interpret" the Bible in such a way as to reveal either an error in it, or in my interpretation of it. Everyone get that? The Bible (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | God's Nature
|
|
(...) You are kidding, right? (...) Hmmm. So you are telling me that you know that exact nature of God? (...) That they perceived God was and whether God actually was are 2 very different things. (...) What are you implying here? That you understand (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) You confuse me. What is the difference? (...) Again you confuse me. Superior in what way? (...) Again with the confusion. Laws just don't pop up out of thin air. They are based on the morality and sensibility of a given society or culture. (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bush AWOL
|
|
(...) When you combine this with (URL) you get part of MAD magazine's article: MAD's Deck of 52 least wanted Americans. One of which is the 2004 Democratic presidental nominee: Whether it be Al, Bob, Joe, or Rick, you want a loser take your pick. (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Bush AWOL
|
|
(7 URLs) What can I add to our national disgrace? -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 14-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament: More Laws than You Can Shake a Stick At
|
|
(...) Lenny, Christians would point to passages such as this from Mark 14: 61Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?" 62"I am," said Jesus. "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the (...) (21 years ago, 14-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Imperiled!
|
|
(...) Thanks ROSCO. That brought a smile. Go git 'em, boys! Dave K -"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"--Adm JTK, ST:TWOK (21 years ago, 14-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) Well, your clothing won't get you there as fast, but if you wear the bullet train, you'll probably be overdressed. Dave! (21 years ago, 14-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) Apparently so, Dave! (...) Sure, Dave! ALL you have to do is let me get the last word, Dave! That's really not so hard, you know, Dave! (speaking of debates (internal in this case), I'm torn between taking the bullet train or taking more (...) (21 years ago, 14-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) I don't care enough to research the full breadth of Ms. Nagorka's work (which I likewise find disappointingly pedestrian), but the passage you cite strikes me as a critique by Debs & Co. rather than a formal declaration of intent by the (...) (21 years ago, 14-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Imperiled!
|
|
(...) Sometimes the sarcastic remark, intended to mock when uttered by the speaker, actually contains the germ of the truth. If the legitimacy of our election process is imperiled as greviously as these articles allege (and it's pretty scary stuff, (...) (21 years ago, 14-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
For some other perspectives on this: (URL) Clean up Sculpture on Aisle 9!> (these include people who purport to work for HD, and people who purport to be the gallery owner I cited in my last post, and a bunch of other voices) This has been an (...) (21 years ago, 14-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Another Poetry Hit 'n' Run (was Re: Imperiled!)
|
|
(...) Yeah, too bad people won't actually wake up, they just go to movies with that as the central theme. Intellectually and emotionally inoculated against resistance, they can continue on the heavy dose of soma... ~~~...~~~ Wake Up by Rage Against (...) (21 years ago, 14-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) From (URL) (one of the links given in the article): " Ms. Nagorka's use of Home Depot as off-site site underscores an element of social critique present in the work: which is more suitable as a matrix within which to make works of art, the (...) (21 years ago, 14-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Imperiled!
|
|
(...) Oh well, if you can't fight the corporations with your vote, at least y'all have your guns, right? ROSCO (21 years ago, 13-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Imperiled!
|
|
All the President's Votes? (URL) A Quiet Revolution is Taking Place in US Politics. By the Time It's Over, the Integrity of Elections Will be in the Unchallenged, Unscrutinized Control of a Few Large - and Pro-Republican - Corporations. Andrew (...) (21 years ago, 13-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) It seemed stunningly obvious to me that in large part you decided that the artist and NPR were indulging in some sort of anti-corporate crusade in regards to this particular case, evidence that I simply did not see. You've repeated the charge (...) (21 years ago, 13-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) Take your time with a response, if any. LEGOWORLD understandably takes precedence over OT ruminations... (...) The bogging appears to focus on *how wrong* her act was/is, rather than on whether or not it is wrong in some absolute sense. To (...) (21 years ago, 13-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) I am pressed for time, lots of LEGOWORLD prep I gotta do, so... briefly... (if such is possible) The original post I made sort of took as a given (because it was stunningly obvious to me, anyway) that what she's doing is morally wrong, and was (...) (21 years ago, 13-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) I can't comment on Mr. Schlkbrnd's patronage, but I think you've otherwise made your strongest point. If she's making a profit at HD's expense, then HD is within its rights to try to recoup its share of that profit (and that's in addition to (...) (21 years ago, 13-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) I don't think so. Hmm. You've come up with a good counterexample, at least on the surface. The easy counter is to discuss intent, your intent presumably was to buy the items til you changed your mind, while she (being an HD hater with a (...) (21 years ago, 13-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) Let me see if I understand this. If I go into a store and put a LEGO set in my cart, walk around for an hour or so, and then return that LEGO set to a shelf very near where I'd first picked it up, then I've committed a crime? (...) That's a (...) (21 years ago, 13-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) In general, or at specific naff implementations? (...) I'm not sure quite how far back to go to answer this. Do you deny that it's even possible for a private firm to do something more efficiently than a government? If you do, we have no basis (...) (21 years ago, 13-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) Sorry, I'm not really being relevant. Just a bit p****d off with the government privatising and contracting out stuff. I can't see how it can cost less or be better as at the end of the day some of the money has to go to shareholders. In the (...) (21 years ago, 12-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) How about them? In a free market, they won't be in business very long, will they? (...) Perhaps you can elaborate a bit on what exactly you're getting at. (21 years ago, 12-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | why off-topic.debate?
|
|
Why isn't this group called off-topic.USpolitics? Tim Mind you it does give me an outlet when I'm feeling annoyed and I fcan stand back and laugh as well :) (21 years ago, 12-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) I absolutely agree that major corporations more often than not are run for the benefit of management and not the stockholders. They do it in a variety of ways, too. Only recently have the stockholders started to question the huge salaries and (...) (21 years ago, 12-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) how about companies that are run for the benefit of the stock/shareholders to the detriment of service to the customer? This is endemic in companies that supply services to the public sector, especially where the service was previously (...) (21 years ago, 12-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Back to bigger topics...
|
|
I've posted links to Hanson stuff before, and he's probably one of my favorites at NRO (not exactly a hotbed of balanced reporting or opinions) as he puts things into interesting perspectives even if I don't always agree with him. (URL) final (...) (21 years ago, 12-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) OK. Fair enough. And as a most minor among minor shareholders my opinion doesn't count for much. (to management, speaking as a shareholder). However (since this tiny thing is veering off in many different directions) would you agree or (...) (21 years ago, 12-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) No, as in meaning that your opinion that there is a problem that needs to be dealt with is not shared (currently) by the various managers involved. (...) Prosecute: no, I'm not conceding that, except as a consequence of the artist not bowing (...) (21 years ago, 12-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) It's a little hard to take this too seriously, but I'll try just for a moment of distraction... But first, let's make some things clear: 1. HD has terrible service 2. HD is usually very understaffed 3. HD is actually a dangerous place to shop (...) (21 years ago, 12-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) Meaning that they're not doing their job... we have an endemic problem in the US with management tending to ignore the actual owners of the company, and this is just one more example, albeit minor. (...) Or prosecute. Which I think you're (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) She's responsible for her own actions. But that's just my view - see below. (...) If she delibrately broke her own foot, that would actually be fraud, not theft. If an accident, and a jury found the store in part responsible because it did not (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) This seems to be your opinion more than the management of Home Depot, which seem to view it as a mild annoyance at the worst. (...) You are comparing a prosecutable crime with a non-crime. They are free to toss her from the store if they find (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) I've got a "What if?" She's stacking up these bricks without the store's OK to show off her artistic talents. One slips out of her hands as she's stacking and it is the last and highest placed. The brick then lands on her foot and breaks (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) Which someone has to clean up. That's a theft of labor (the cleanup) as well as stealing use of the materials (the pieces are not available for sale while she's "using" them) as well as hinderance of trade (while she's "sculpting", it's harder (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) I fail to see where she steals anything in the store. She just rearranges the stock into interesting, if ephemral, shapes. Where's she appearing next? I'll even buy something in the store. :-) -->Everyone's an Art Critic<-- (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(URL) ran across this from somewhere else) "since Nagorka generally goes to work in the aisles without prior permission from store officials" Except for the above, note how the story doesn't really even mention the fact that this "artist" (scare (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) Except inasmuch as it would get her out of MI I am not seeing that as a good thing. IIANM, it's not legislation that is required, it would be a constitutional amendment. (the legislation would merely be the first step in getting the amendment (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) Why stop there? Why not just abandon all pretense and elect Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz or Salem bin Laden? On the other hand, such legislation would enable Jennifer Granholm to run. You know, one thing that embarrasses me terribly as an American is (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) Dude, I said maybe... ;) -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) That's a good point. There is that law saing only American born peeps can be president. Is that a good thing? Overall, I guess--it would prevent some charismatic foreigner from becoming president and screwing things over. Though to be said, it (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
Under CURRENT law, Ahnold can't become president, right? He is foreign born. Not that that will stop him - someone else is currently trying to change that (probably specifically FOR him)... (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
Urp, dangling referent! (...) The "They" referred to in this footnote are the Saudis, not those TimeWarner folks behind TIME magazine. Whether TTWFBTM wish us well or not is an exercise left to the reader. :-) I certainly have my views, but in the (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) I've always supported Michael Moore despite the somewhat shaky documentation he often provides for his arguments and the somewhat hasty conclusions he often draws from them, but I'm happy to have been wrong about the above point. Michael Moore (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) With him so far.... (...) This was the part where I thought he veered off into foaming a bit.. (...) Don't you just hate it when people who clearly are weasely lying sniveling gits(1) might actually be right about just about everything they (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) Old, but extremely important news for most U.S. idiots. (...) Not new, important. (...) The case has not yet really been made against OBL -- of course, he has also vanished without a trace. Maybe they never really wanted to "get him" in the (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) I know that MM isn't held with much credbility in these here circles, but 'Dude, where's my country?' may hopefully restore some... (URL) which questions are asked and researched-- " 1. Is it true that the Bin Ladens have had business (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
More of the lies in detail... Claims vs. Facts: President Bush's New Hampshire Speech to Air National Guard Reservists (URL) WMD IN IRAQ claim: "Since the liberation of Iraq, our investigators have found evidence of a clandestine network of (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
