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 / *2246 (-20)
  Re: George McGovern quote
 
(...) I'll bite and expand it a little. Since the rich would not have been able to get rich in the first place without the benefit of the system and people on whose backs they climbed (the low income schlubs who work for them), they *do* owe a debt (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: George McGovern quote
 
(...) At a guess -- and this is just a guess, mind you -- they pay for it and they work for it. All at the expense of neglecting the poor and the infirm, who deserve it more. (1) Cheers, - jsproat 1. Yes, this is chum for a troll. Discuss. :-, (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  (canceled)
 
 
  I don't want to live in Paducah, KY
 
(URL) favorite quote: "We should be getting information out to workers and residents in a better way than we're doing at the present," Michaels said. No kidding. Who says government regulation, standards or oversight makes you safe? (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  George McGovern quote
 
"Rich people, healthy people, they don't need much attention from the government." (just heard on Larry King Live) So why do they get so much? :-) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  t7po autopick
 
<37E1178D.C32F22F5@aeieng.com> <37E11F18.DD7E06BF@voyager.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) c /unaswered/unanswered/ do NOT c/unaswered/unassward/ although my t7po does phonetically sounds like (...) (25 years ago, 16-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
 
  Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
 
(...) Ok, so basically the main difference is in the exemption of animals from morality that I suggested. You're saying they have their own morality, still ultimate, but a different ultimate morality than our own? Ok. I guess one of the points that (...) (25 years ago, 16-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
 
David Eaton wrote in message ... (...) you (...) to (...) cause (...) it (...) can (...) act (...) our (...) I didn't really mean either of your definitions. I think every creature has the same morality - to survive by whatever means necessary, but (...) (25 years ago, 16-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
 
(...) Larry, I don't think you could ever really annoy me, I have been saying go Larry to much on your responses, even with the pink elephants. :) (...) Oh, it does go around. I get frustrated with unnecessary tangents, ones in which Jeremy seems to (...) (25 years ago, 16-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
 
(...) Just trying to inject a little levity, Scott, which Sproat riffed on. I wouldn't interpret that post as anything other than as a response to me, so if you want to be annoyed, be annoyed at me. As to the more substantive issues, hey I like to (...) (25 years ago, 16-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
 
Sproaticus wrote: <snipped how Jeremy is so pleased with himself> Whatever. I thought about responding to this inane reply, but why bother? I certainly think you dodged around enough of my points, and threw in irrelevant items that had nothing to do (...) (25 years ago, 16-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
 
(...) Aha! I think some headway has been made... I can see one of two possible arguments you are making... maybe you can tell me which is more correct? #1: "An entity is judgeable morally as long as it has considered morality. Hence, those not (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
 
David Eaton wrote in message ... (...) Hopefully (...) definition (...) actions (...) is (...) really (...) I (...) humans, (...) animals (...) he (...) years (...) or (...) you, (...) backwards (...) as in (...) idea (...) I'll (...) can (...) (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: McDonald's, LEGO and Ethics
 
My wife just fowarded this over to me. I skimmed over it briefly and it seems applicable to some of this discussion. LMKWYT. -Chris (URL) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
 
(...) I like my job :) (...) I'm gonna do the "remember this as you read my post" thing... "even if animals can reason to some extent... they aren't anywhere near humans" (...) Again, remember! (...) Hmmm.... "people are in a variety of stages of (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
 
This message is huge again! I wish I had as much free time at work as you, David. I still have an unfinished reply to one of your previous posts in a draft folder. Hopefully I can finish this one in one sitting... David Eaton wrote in message ... (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
 
<37DF8CDA.DA847F05@aeieng.com> <37DFA51E.EF0A5623@voyager.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) I agree. I'll bite. :-, (...) Well, sure, I mentioned the Nuremburg Defense, true, but! It was well (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
 
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <37DFA51E.EF0A5623@v...er.net>... (...) That was a cheap trick on Sproat's part. Without actually coming out and saying it, he got Scott to say it. So its cheating, no doubt about it, and Sproat loses (anyway, I (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep
 
(...) And is that a good thing(Jags RULE, d00d!) or a bad thing (Lucas, prince of darkness.. motto of the Lucas electric works: "a good day's work and home before dark!") ? (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
 
OK, who "lost"(1) this debate? Scott because he officially said the word "Nazi" first, or Sproat, who mentioned "Nurenburg Defense" which, although it does not explicitly contain the word, is clearly related? If it wasn't Sproat (judges, do we have (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, 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