 | | Somebody help.
|
|
There is this Girl I'd like to ask out but i don't have the courage(I'm a chicken:) to. Any suggestions? There's a catch to this also; I'm a freshman and she's, I think a junior Please send any suggestions straight to me at kyblue2@zoomnnet.net - (...) (25 years ago, 2-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Hunger website
|
|
(...) That's true -- in terms of effort on the part of the doners, it's the best way to go! Much easier than donating, say, a kidney. :-, (...) Eh? I saw no spam coming from you, sir. I'm reconsidering what I said eariler -- I no longer think you (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Hunger website
|
|
(...) As far as donations go, I'd certainly agree. But they didn't require anything from me... I tried it before posting it (one would hope I would!) and it was simply a single click-- no cookies were dropped, no forms to fill out, no information to (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
(...) The key difference here is that the Holocaust, as bad things go, is pretty much the tops. You can't get badder than that. It's a plateau of nightmares -- once you're at the summit no one can out-climb you. The Holocaust is an event that (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Hunger website
|
|
(...) Sorry for throwing spam... I hadn't really been hit by it yet (just the friend of mine that sent it to me via email), and it seemed noteworthy, rather than 'GET YOUR FREE EMAIL TODAY!' or something... Anyway, apologies to those who didn't want (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Hunger website
|
|
(...) You've been spammed, but I don't think directly from the Hunger Site. It's not cost-efficient to spam guest books. They also have a disclaimer for exactly this kind of thing: (URL) I haven't been hit, and I'm a member of both the Legomaniac's (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
(...) i haven't been able to stop thinking about the issues presented in this debate, as it concerns the 2 great passsions of my life. i'd like to clarify another term and pose a question. art and illustation are separate things. illustation is a (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Atrocities far away (Was: Art?)
|
|
(...) It's interesting, then, to note that the Chief Executive of our government has so much invested overseas, e.g. China. I'm sure he had little real influence over our involvement in East Timor, but one has to wonder sometimes... (...) Pretty (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Atrocities far away (Was: Art?)
|
|
(...) Yep, and you know mine too, we're NOT our brother's keeper but certain levels of Evil require intervention by governments, as they are a disease that may spread... lower levels of evil require that governments not block people volunteering to (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Atrocities far away (Was: Art?)
|
|
(...) You know my stand on this -- we must intervene because we're in a "brother's keeper" position. Yadda yadda yadda. Old argument. It's an interesting question, though, about the U.S. feeling guilty for our "mismanaged entry" into WWII. We almost (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
(...) Which prompts an interesting question...I wonder if Libera is one of the reasons TLG is so reluctant to respond to AFOL's; maybe everytime someone brings up "bulk orders" or "adults want Lego too" KKK freaks and says "Are you nuts! Remember (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
Well put, Sproat. WE MUST NEVER FORGET. I'm not 100% sure my parents didn't have some blood on their hands and I'm not 100% sure what to do about it. Interesting op ed piece yesterday analysing Buchanan. Hate that guy but he makes a point that the (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
(...) I'd say that you were in the right and TLG was in the wrong. (...) In .debate ?!? Are you kidding? ;-) (...) This has been discussed here before: (URL) summary, Libera's motive was to make an *issue* of the recent trivialization of the (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
(...) What does it mean that you question it? My personal take on art is that it can be in any medium. (...) So, if someone epoxied Hot Wheels together in the form of a rhinoceros, it would be somehow inappropriate? (...) Lego, per se, doesn't have (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) :) yeah, the subconscious is tough... (...) Ok, I can see that... Hmmm... maybe it would be fairer to say that the law can be 'bad'. Not *morally* bad, but ill-concieved. In other words, a law becomes less and less 'good' (ethically good, you (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
(...) John, I both agree and disagree with parts of what you say here. First of all I do believe that LEGO is an art medium. We all build things and many of us put them up for display either on the internet or elsewhere. In my oppinion just the fact (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
My mom gave me this article a few years ago, and I thought it was really unrealistic, because the picture showed the policeman (SS Trooper?) hitting a skeleton minifigure with a club. I also thought it was a bit much for the artist to use LEGO (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
(...) hello, y'all ~ i just posted to RTL yesterday my belief that LEGO is ART... and then i see this thread. i have been an artist my entire life, starting private classes at 12, figure drawing at 16, began working professionally at 19, and now on (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
John Neal wrote in message <37F305FB.3B2896F5@u...st.net>... (...) the (...) what (...) porn? To (...) Spielberg's (...) make (...) would (...) I don't know whether anyone can truly say what is and isn't "art", but I strongly agree with the idea (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
John Neal: [ About Zbigniew Libera's Concentration Camp model: (URL) ] (...) I think that is the whole point. Even the "sweet" toys we give kids can be used to depict horrible things. AFAIR Libera also created scenes from mankind's dark side with (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? (was Re: LEGO as Art)
|
|
Hello John; I certainly don't want to get into a huge debate with you... :-) But I would be happy to participate in a civilized discussion. I am not one who normally goes to art exhibitions or one who has a passion for art; both viewing and (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance
|
|
(...) Of course people develop their moral code. But no two people are going to have the same code, which means that no one individual can know wether someone else is acting morally. (I took some leaps of logic there) (...) I do not claim to not (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Hmm. Ok, fair. That's a difference in how we define morality. To me, morality is a matter of the conscious mind. Unless, of course, we're defining the subconscious differently, but I'm >not< going there! ;-) (...) Ah yes, but that doesn't mean (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance
|
|
(...) Reading some of your posts, I see that you carefully differentiate self-defined "morals" and socially defined "ethics." The problem I have with this dichotomy is that it is impotent (no "r") to avoid imposing one's own morality on others. If I (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: U.S. history question
|
|
(...) Here's an excerpt from a page on why Massachusetts is a Commonwealth ((URL) From 1776 to 1780 the words 'State of Massachusetts Bay' appeared on the top of all acts and resolves. In 1780, the Massachusetts Constitution went into effect. Part (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance
|
|
(...) I heard a good one a few weeks ago... Three engineers, a mechanical engineer, a chemical engineer, and a Microsoft engineer, are riding in a car when the engine quits. The mechanical engineer suggests a rebuild of the engine. The chemical (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | U.S. history question
|
|
(I'm posting this to .debate, not to debate but rather to catch the attention of those who reside here, and 'cause there's really no better place for it. We could probably use lugnet.off-topic.history , but it would probably be the least-read ng on (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) And that's really why I feel the need to judge by intent. If I see one person kill another, I can see the action, but not the intent. Perhaps the killer had no idea he was killing, or whatever. His intent could concievably be such that his (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance
|
|
(...) Of course there's a potential, but such a regeneration would not be in the interest of manufacturers, so I wouldn't count on them to foster it by providing the public with balanced information unless required by law. This is part of my problem (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance
|
|
(...) Granted. No one said it would be easy to move in the direction I'd like to see us move in. But in turn I'm sure you'd admit that the potential is there for the regeneration of such a base. (...) I'll claim that there are some examples but not (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The NFL has expanded to the point of mediocrity
|
|
(...) Not me but I AM willing to predict some teams that WON'T be in, barring meteor strikes or some other unusual circumstance. (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The NFL has expanded to the point of mediocrity
|
|
Hmmmm ... Minnesota??? have you seen them play lately? The offense doesn't seem to be able to move the ball much ... granted, there are some good plays, but mixed in, there's a bunch of not-so-great ones. They've yet to have a really dominant game. (...) (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | test
|
|
sorry, this is only test. (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Doesn't have to be taken to an extreme. If I happen to see a total stranger kill someone, I know what has happened, but not why. (...) Sorry, being unclear in the interests of brevity(1). You were saying (paraphrase warning!) that you felt (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Well, to the absolutest of my theory, yes. I have no grounds for assuming anyone else's intent, and have no basis for proof. But the point is that it usually does seem to work. That is, usually, I can judge someone's intent fairly well. But (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance
|
|
(...) I think competitive improvement requires the postulate of an informed, active consumer base, which does not seem descriptive of America today. Frankly, when I see ads for "Pumpernickel limestone shampoo - the tingle tells you it's better than (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Do you think morality is internal (only I can determine if I am moral), or external (you can determine if I am moral)? If external, then who defines morality? (...) I disagree. Only the druggist can determine if he has a moral obligation to (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: So?
|
|
I agree. If cost is no object, MIT is clearly in the top 5 in the world (along with CalTech)... (...) As long as you get what you neeeed... :-) (or is a stones reference dating me?) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) I think the issue Libertarians have with government regulation about standards, quality, and labels is not with intent. We're willing to grant, for the sake of argument, good intent(1). Our issue is just that they don't, by and large, actually (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: So?
|
|
(...) I guess I should have learned by know that there is no such thing as a casual statement here. I did not mean to get into a big debate on this but I do agree that if cost is a factor then MIT is probably not quite what it is as when you take (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.loc.us.ma.bos, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Determining intent can only be inferential, not observational. This makes judging by intent inherently less impartial than judging by actions. (...) I do not trust myself to judge anyone's intent.(1) I am not omniscient, and I will never know (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
I don't want to dwell on the morality topic, since it seems that it's being beaten into the ground. But I will say this: I think that the highest form of morality stems from compassion - the ability to experience the suffering of others as if it (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Yep. What it really means is I can't judge you. Only you can judge you. I can do my darndest to try, and usually, in our society, we can do a pretty good job of determining someone else's intent. We don't always get the details right, and (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Hmm. I think there is a fundamental difference in the way we determine morality. See below. (...) How can I, or you, or anyone, accurately judge someone's intent? It is impossible to empirically determine intent. Actions can be observed, (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Well, I think my view on it is that it's required in order to be moral... We don't 'require' people to be moral, but if they're not, then people like me call them jerks. They're not unjust, per se; they are certainly within their rights, but (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) There is a difference between holding and even publicising an opinion that the druggist is a slug, and using force to require him to sell the drug. There is nothing wrong with that opinion even being wrong (in the examples Larry stated of (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Even you are a little squeamish about the druggist's behaviour: "If I were he I'd work out a payment plan blah blah blah" And yet you cannot find anything morally wrong in it, either. It all works out logically (why he is justified to (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Not exactly. More like it IS everything else. Any right I recognise, ultimately, is a property right or can be reduced to one. (...) Well, here we go round the mulberry bush again, :-) but as I stated in the past, I don't accept the above as a (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
I think what this is really about is how highly do you rate property rights. Larry seems to be arguing that the right to property superceeds everything else. It's impossible to say what's right in this hypothetical situation, since so much depends (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) The druggist is clearly and willfully taking action that is harmful to a human life. If you consider that immoral, then it is immoral. His motivations do not matter. Even if he is (under his moral code) preventing a greater evil (for example, (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) No, it was to increase the level of information in the market place. I WANT sellers to dig out rare sets, and I want buyers to buy them. If they are blowing their money on stuff they can get at retail, they're not spending their money on rare (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Hmm... Important to Hienz's claim on the drug? No. They're not. Hienz has no claim to the drug if he hasn't acquired it from the druggist in some manner (trading/selling/performing services/etc.. not threats or beatings, etc., though) Is it (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) As with all these little morality puzzles, we don't have enough facts to conclude that. For all we know, Heinz skipped buying health insurance to cover the drug because he wanted to go bowling, or because he needed the money to pay his last (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Neither more nor less, because they are not actually different things. Right to life and right to property are the same thing. ALL rights are property rights in my schema. The "right to life" as I see it is my right to dispose of my life as I (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) All of these are irrelevant to the main thrust. The druggist's motivations for not selling are not important. (...) Why? (...) Allow me to draw a parallel hypothetical situation. There is a natural disaster, and several people are left in a (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) This is why Libertarianism breaks down because mean people suck. Not all people are good. If *everyone* had a good heart, people would be able to respect property rights AND each other's needs as well. But as it is, a heartless Bunghole is (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) So in your schema, right to property is more important than right to life. (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Old debates die hard :) (...) I certainly agree here. Heinz doesn't appear to me to have any right to the drug; and neither does his wife. Rights don't really seem to dictate proper ownership in this case other than the druggist. After all, (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) [2] (...) Agreed. No moral situation here. (possibly an ethical one, but that's a different debate, and this case doesn't have enough information to make an ethical judgement). However, I'm fairly certain I can make a good case for the (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Weeeelllll... I know I'm walking into the same old debate as before! But it seems SO clear cut to me. In my opinion Heinz doesn't have the right to the drug. If this drug really truly is somehting Heinz is incapable of inventing for himself, (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Mayhap I'm confused. How is this a moral dilema? James (URL) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The NFL has expanded to the point of mediocrity
|
|
(...) can (...) I agree that expansion must be put in check. It is really just one really big piramid scheme where the older teams get all the expansion money and the new teams have to agree to lower TV revenue for a certain period. It all seems to (...) (25 years ago, 26-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The NFL has expanded to the point of mediocrity
|
|
Interesting discussion going on in rec.music.arts.drumcorps. Have the recent expansion teams in the NFL created a mediocrity in most franchises? The great players no longer have teams that can back them up: Young, Rice, Moss, Favre, Smith, Davis, (...) (25 years ago, 26-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: George McGovern quote
|
|
(...) But are you referring to a socialist society or a capitalist society? Surely, in a socialist society, you owe everything to everyone, and in a capitalist one you owe it all to yourself. How about we start with a given: we need both. A purely (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
|
|
(...) Interesting, I have the same feeling about most of what you utter as well. Anyway, lets look into it. (...) That is one of the things that the military expects from you. If you don't like it, don't be in the military. Murder, whether at war, (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
|
|
Just doing my part, John! :) Scott S. (...) My constant enjoyment of life! (...) Yeah, it will just be peachy! :) (...) Here's another one: "Doing my part to enrage the atheist left." Have a great day! (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Complex number theory (Was: God and the Devil and forgiveness)
|
|
(...) I finally figured out what it was about this statement that bothered me! Math (a valid part of logic, arguably) has real difficulty resolving even low-order functions on 4-dimensional complex numbers (1). There are at least two main camps of (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: God and the Devil and forgiveness (was Re: POV-RAY orange color)
|
|
(...) AAAAAGHH!!! This was *SUPPOSED* to say: "...I see no reason to not include the teaching of science in religion." Netscape's bogo-checker let that one through. ...Lest folks think of me as (more of) a jibbering lunatic... :-, Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep
|
|
(...) All I can say is that despite how nice Europe is, I could never live in Europe. Everything is just too expensive compared to the US. For example, I paid US$X for my car. It the UK, the car cost £X, and thats a big difference. And then there is (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
|
|
(...) They would justify it to themselves. From their point of view, you're part of the problem. Of course, you're perfectly justified -- from your end -- in defending yourself in any way you can. (...) You do have the right to withdraw at any time (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
|
|
(...) Ok, well, I'm not really concerned with what the dictionary says. Ask the dictionary what morality is, and I bet it won't define it as well as we've tried to here. If you want quick terminology, go to the dictionary; if you really want the (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
|
|
(...) Yup. And sometimes it's crystal clear. (...) Guess that depends on your perspective. They'd say yes, I'd say no, you'd probably agree with me. (...) In most cases, yes. And in most cases, obeying is almost a reflex. But there have been some (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
|
|
(...) I disagree, depending on circumstances. (And so do you, sort of.) Shooting helpless whomever is immoral if they're no threat. What if letting them live will allow them to further contribute to the infrastructure of war against your side? Kill (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Speeding: Prima facie negligence?
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote (...) One measure of a democracy is whether you can vote for the revolution, I suppose. While I don't want the outcome you want, I'm inclined to agree that you deserve points for trying. But not many, since I (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
|
|
Mike Stanley <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote (...) Mike, while I don't want to get into a debate with you about military service in general, the issue of "who is the enemy" is a very fuzzy one, and at various times all sorts of people have been (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)
|
|
I'm answering, even though you adressed this the Chris Weeks: Scott Edward Sanburn <ssanburn@aeieng.com> wrote (...) No. It is not, and can never be. Simply killing someone is barely scratching the surface of hatred. (...) IMO, yes. "I kill you with (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
(...) Sure - I don't have a problem with that. It'd make a change to make a profit! (...) If I have them and I don't want then then thats fine with me. Richard (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
(...) I tell you what - you find some 4558's for retail price at some old store and I'll buy as many as you have at 10% over retail. Better yet, I'll give you a list of parts that I want and the sets they're available in, and I'll gladly pay you 10% (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair Auction? (Was Re: Honest Capitalism)
|
|
(...) I agree - and I think I answered it in: (URL) I won't waste disk space by repeating myself too much! :) Richard (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
