 | | Re: This is where I actually want a gun
|
|
(...) But if we are not outraged when atrocities occur, we are morally doomed. (...) How would it be unjust? Showing him the same mercy he showed seems just to me. The injustice is that there is a family whose lives have been completely shattered (...) (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This is where I actually want a gun
|
|
(...) Well it should be pointed out that those are Old Testament books and while Christ never repudiated them he didn't exactly go around saying they were spot on as moral guides given the new relationship of god with man that was represented by the (...) (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This is where I actually want a gun
|
|
(...) Dude, I am imperfect and this is an imperfect world. Somehow, I believe he will come to full judgment for his actions, but probably not in this world. The closest thing I could think of to a fitting judgment here on earth would be to condemn (...) (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This is where I actually want a gun
|
|
(...) Maybe this one: "I will strew your flesh on the mountains, and fill the valleys with your carcass. I will drench the land with your flowing blood up to the mountains, and the watercourses will be filled with you." Eze 32:5-6 or this one: "Now (...) (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This is where I actually want a gun
|
|
(...) Well, I did start the post with " Which is probably why I shouldn't be allowed to get one... " See, when the emotions get involved, can one really make a rational decision where life is concerned. I don't know what's the right thing to do. If (...) (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This is where I actually want a gun
|
|
(...) But, John, the death penalty is, so, well, final. What if there was a mistake? It does happen, you know. Even in these apparently close and shut cases, with "confessions" and neat surveilance videotapes and everything. What if the prison (...) (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This is where I actually want a gun
|
|
(...) Which part of the teachings of Christ are you reflecting...I can't seem to find that part. Chris (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This is where I actually want a gun
|
|
(...) Oh, you mean in the way that he was in and out of prison like spinning in a turnstyle? (...) Wrong. Stops him from ever doing it again. (...) What is it with you Liberals? What is there to understand? Evil is evil. Stop trying to understand it (...) (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) Tradition would say that Scott was being sarcastic, but maybe he wasn't. Either he honestly wanted my opinion, or perhaps it was rhetorical but he felt there was a point to it. I already placed my qualifier ("for the most part") but, yes, my (...) (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) Hmmmm, I'm not sure where you are going with that analogy. Tom Cruise remains Tom Cruise whatever I do, the Queen is your Queen because you subject yourself to her. (...) Aha! You admit that the UK does not live up to its propaganda! You (...) (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) You are such a troll! Why not ask Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan or any of the other 1,000s of black millionaires your question. Shesh. (...) Ubertroll take off! JOHN (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote: (snipped quotations) What I thought: nowhere did he ever use the term "imminent". (...) The meaning of your non-sequitur eludes me. What Bush wanted was Saddam Hussein removed from power, period. (...) (...) (21 years ago, 8-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) Yeah; we have our Queen, you have Tom Cruise (etc). ;) (...) I support the UK monarchy... but I tend not to read the tabloids. ;) (...) You are stealing my point! (...) Even if one is black? (...) They must have been the Schlickbernd's of (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) Does the propaganda live up to reality for everyone in the USA? Scott A (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) It could be worse - we could have idiot royalty. Now that would really be lame. But then again, their antics can be amusing. To be less silly, what country lives up to its propaganda? Is the U.S. the land of the free and the home of the brave, (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) Does the propaganda live up to reality in the USA? Scott A (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) This is sarcasm, right? "we pretend to work, and the state pretends to pay us" ... that sort of thing? Presumably workers don't flee a workers "paradise" unless the quotation marks are there for a reason. (remember, I'm biased... both my (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This is where I actually want a gun
|
|
(...) I’d suggest you let justice take its course; it may transpire that this guy was/is unstable in some way. Even if he does turn out to be 100% ‘evil’, killing him after the event will accomplish nothing. Understanding "why" would accomplish (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) I hear healthcare is better than many Americans have too. Perhaps if Bush lifted sanctions it'd be even better. Without sanctions, Castro would be history by now. Scott A (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Hitler’s debt to America (Re: To change the tune...)
|
|
(...) Talking of which.... (URL) Hitler's debt to America:> "One such agitator was a disgruntled corporal in the German army. In 1924, he was serving time in prison for mob action. While there, he spent his time poring over eugenic textbooks, which (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) Not so. Many Cubans are happy with their lives in paradise. Two hours of work per day and 22 for free time in which to study for free for ever...doesn't sound totally bad to me. (Though I'd really want reliable power and a fat pipe.) Chris (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) Well, supposedly we get a promise from the government that they won't be mistreated if they get repatriated, and supposedly we "monitor compliance" with that. Wanna know what I think of THAT strategy, or the promises of THAT government? (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
(...) Won't something very bad happen to them when they get home? Doesn't Castro frown on folks leaving his country 'illegally'? If all the Cubans fled to the US, Castro would have no one to push around. I mean, shouldn't the US be welcoming every (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Some people call Buicks "boats"...
|
|
and some USE them as boats. (URL) have any questions about my stand on whether these intrepid voyagers should be given asylum or not? PS, 1959 was a VERY good year for Buicks, by the way... (1) ++Lar 1 - although my Daddy was driving a 1957 Buick (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) c/ be no/ be almost no/ and we agree. I think there are a *few* honest politicians out there. Ron Paul for example... (URL) (a good read in and of itself) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) He shouldn't be in office in either case. And, no, we didn't elect him. If we get to stone every politician who lied, there would be no politicians - not that doesn't sound bad. :-) -->Bruce<-- (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | This is where I actually want a gun
|
|
Which is probably why I shouldn't be allowed to get one... Seriously, I'd buy the bullet and pull the trigger. She was 11 years old. This guy, if shown that he did it (as all evidence points towards like surveillence tape and DNA all over his car (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) He should be! That's what I was saying. If he just screwed up, he should only be impeached. If he did it on purpose, his fate should be well worse. Chris (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Any kiwis on the list?
|
|
Followed a link from one of my fave comics ( (URL) (1) ) to this: (URL) article> anyone know what the heck this is about? What I mean is what's the root dispute? ++Lar 1 - yes, it's cheezy space opera with a layer of titillation... what's your (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) I think you're just mellowing in your old age--we all get there :) We also pick and choose our battles, but knowing that our friends will be there when we feel like taking a break from the battles is a good thing. I'm there for ya, Larry. (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) Um, why isn't this an impeachable offense? (I admit it, my wife dinged me for this... she pointed out that I was screaming for the head of Clinton because he was an admitted perjurer (over something relatively unimportant, but the principle of (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) Perfectly agreed--SH's finagling and ousting inspectors and flaunting UN resolutions was a terrible thing. No one has ever stated that SH wasn't a tyrannical dictator with much blood on his hands. But at the time in question--from just before (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
By and large, I agree with DaveK's attack on our president. He lied to us and I believe, still, that he is a bad man. But that doesn't change the fact that Saddam Hussein is also a bad man. Really bad! I do believe that the world is a better place (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) "The Iraqi regime ... possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons." -- George W. Bush "We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) I care! If he truly blew it, then he is merely unimaginably stupid. (Why was it obvious to lots of CIA analysts, reporters, and other nations around the world, and many of us that this whole thing was rigged, but not to our president?) And (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) I think I already summed up this same position some time ago right here: either Dubya lied, or he was incompetent. Either way, he led the country into a contrived war, spending billions of dollars, the lives of our troops, ruined our country's (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) The rest of your fine post is fatally weakened by the above sentence. Troll through some Bush speeches and you'll find the claims, in plain daylight. Heck, take a look at the Powell speech to the UN just prior, they're there. (to find that (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) The reason I asked is because I know for a fact that nobody ever claimed such. It was blown intelligence and everybody bought it (why wouldn't they? SH, the complete idiot, wanted everyone to believe he had them. Bet he never thought we'd (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) Oh come on, John. You HAVE to admit the administration has been backpedaling from their previous claims, even if Dave hasn't provided specific cites from the various speeches. I mean, who has time? (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote: "You're wrong--he has WoMD (...) Cites, please. Whom are you quoting? (...) Specific cites of quotations, please. (...) That's just you propping up a straw man. JOHN (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) Well, maybe you could come close. I've seen you use "arrant nonsense"(1) in a sentence before, haven't I? (...) Tool or fool, but not cool. 1 - one of my favorite phrasings (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) Let's look at the exact wuote then, shall we?(seeing as how it;s right at the end of the article, it's pretty easy to find...) " I am not comparing the U.S. to Nazi Germany. But one does begin to understand in all this how the Germans, another (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) Yes, precisely. Chris (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) And then go on to compare the US to Nazi Germany! Huh? JOHN (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) People seem to have to state that these days if they start talking about the US administration leading the people down the primrose path, hyping up the 'terror alerts'. Funny how the comparison is, well, not an exact fit, as hardly any (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
I particularly liked "I am not comparing the U.S. to Nazi Germany." Chris (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | To change the tune...
|
|
(URL) couldn't have said it better. There is that old adage--let history be the judge. I wonder, in 100 years what will history think of Dubya? Dave K (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
(...) Nuts to that. I have you on record agreeing with me, so that's the end of it! 8^P (...) Not personal responsibility, but the particular framing of the parent/child contract. Larry gave a better alternative breakdown than I provided, so I'll (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) Marriage is also a formal statement of interpersonal committment, and the legal recognition of marriage entitles the spouse to benefits and responsibilities not available to non-spouses. (...) No need for that; many same-sex couples already (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
(...) Yes, though I remember things being a bit crowded, but obviously the only way I was remotely going to get any sleep was to share the couch... (...) have (...) I don't remember many details. I was trying to put him to bed in his room. I'm (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Peanuts on Airplanes (was Re:Skin)
|
|
(...) So this is an interesting example, because the negative effects are pretty well understood, and the costs of an alternative are pretty well understood. Of course what may not be so understood is how many other substances can cause fatal (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) The answer is obvious. There are not enough of them around in these parts. I suspect they tend to live in warmer climates. Don (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
Out of curiosity, why do you think we haven't passed compulsory nudity laws for those neurotics who are afraid of clothing? Chris (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: jj: only in america?
|
|
(...) Yes, I've heard all about microwave cookbooks. Scott A (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) You're almost right here, but you're doing things in the wrong order. Heal the sick people of their neuroses first. Then strike down the no longer needed laws designed to protect them from the consequences of these neuorses. (...) How can you (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: jj: only in america?
|
|
(...) And not only that, but it was home-cooked and not McDonald's! (the shame) (...) Touche;-) (...) I'm sure it won't be for the lack of trying;-) JOHN (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
(...) It is improbable, but not impossible. Surely, the key must then be that you should have the respect of your kids before you encounter your extreme life-or-death scenario? We don’t share the same culture or kids, but for me beating children is (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) Your misunderstanding me. I'm not saying that I should wake up tomorrow and all the laws regarding marriage will be stricken from the books. Just as cutting off one's arm to stem a minor infection would be bad, so to would instantainiously (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) OK. I think you're right... hacking isn't the right approach for the "final answer". however, as a hacker myself, there's value in hacking. If a few states go through various permutations on this (Ohio, I hear is about to do a very restrictive (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) I, at least, would like you to enumerate a handful of these problems. I am now getting the feeling that I misinterpretted your concern (though I just posted a note based on my potential misunderstanding). Chris (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) I agree. Orion is almost implying that infertile individuals should not marry. ;) (...) You've not met my wife. ;) Scott A (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) But you're making a ridiculous comparison. An action by a person that produces a substantially unhealthy state for others is very different than one who does not. The occurrances of people reacting to the sight of a naked body, even a (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) Ok. But what do you propose to replace the dependent support systems tied into those marriage laws you'd like to obliterate? Take your time because there's a lot of details that need to be worked out. Don (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) My contention I that we should do away with marriage laws all together. Government has no business dictating what does or does not constitute a marriage. This dicision is up to the individuals concerned and the life choice they decide to make. (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | jj: only in america?
|
|
(...) You mean you don't eat dinner in front of the TV! What kind of parent are you? Next you'll be saying you eat around the same table and talk to each another! You degenerate! ;-) The JJ incident you mention was reported with astonishment on the (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) I don't think any one definition fits all situations. Look at the peanuts on airplanes issue. Apparently these peanuts cause an extreme amount of suffering for a rather small number of people. The relativly light pain caused to others by (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
Must have been a big couch! How did your nephew lead into the fit without reminding you of what he was seeking? I think I'm not getting part of the situation. Also, what would have been his alternative sleeping arangements? Was it eye-opening only (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) I read your post after I posted my reply to Orion, but I think we're almost on the same page here. I guess the difference is that I see the ongoing hacks to the marriage laws as doing more harm than good. However, we are rapidly approaching (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) Why do you draw the line at 2 people? And for that matter, why not allow 6 year olds to marry if they decide to. Like I said, the law is never going to be perfect. I just don't see how the proposed modifications to current marriage laws make (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
Larry, I did think that Nik was a courteous young man. And I don't mean to suggest that you can not get acceptable, even good, results in turning a child into an adult with corporal punishment as a tool. I was spanked. I'm OK. But I do question how (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) So I agree that unfettered democracy is evil. I think what Orion is asking you is for a definition of "enough people." I'm curious too. (...) I think there is a degree of behavior that could be called impinging on your freedom, but simply (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
(...) I went to bed thinking about this last night. I think I've overstated my agreement. Do you think the notion of personal responsibility (as a valuable more) is "at its essence arbitrary?" I am led to my parent/child debt structure by the twin (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Once again, even with all our problems, Canada--a great place to live...
|
|
(...) ...with laughter. Whatever it was, this is certain: JJ is a pathetic, over-the-hill rock star trying to grasp at one last moment in the spotlight by exposing her middle-aged boob. Move on, JJ. The youth-worshipping culture of Rock'N Roll is (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
What follows is not my best writing... I used a lot of that up today working on deliverables for my client and for BrickFest PDX. But it's a great topic and I wanted to take one more swing before I went to bed... (...) I know Chris didn't completely (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Once again, even with all our problems, Canada--a great place to live...
|
|
(...) FYI, while I didn't see the show, I saw a page on the Drudge Report on it (my only exposure to it). It wasn't a pastie. Pasties cover. It was a nipple-sunburst jewelry piece. Matt's page was incorrect - the nipple was NOT covered, it was (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) With adoption, artificial insemination, host mothers, etc, it's hard to make the argument that "gay marriages can't produce progeny" a meaningful argument any more, in my view. Where I think we still have work to do is on the number... why (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) I agree in the sense the government recognized marriage is useless. Marriage in the sense of 2 people deciding to spend the rest of their lives together and possibly raise offspring is fine. -Orion (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) No. Check out what "Pure Democracy is Evil" has to say about majority rule. I love the silly quotes at the bottom. (URL) The problem with your argument is that it implies all laws are bad (...) Agreed. Except for one small detail. You don't (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
(...) Agreed. Once the child has become recalcitrant, simple, calm reason is often a waste. I like to look at the child's recalcitrance the same way I look at crime, though, and try to prevent it rather than merely responding. A healthy dose of Good (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) Isn't that a majority? (...) I'm saying that laws that infringe on one's personal freedom's are wrong. The Principle of Life Ownership states: "I own my own life. I can do whatever I want to with it. This is a right that I take for myself. No (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) Who said anything about the majority? I just said "enough people". The problem with your argument is that it implies all laws are bad so long as one person disagrees. Well, if that one person likes to kill people, you've got a problem. Without (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
(...) sufficient to (...) behavior is (...) I don't think Chris has ever said that. Now I may be shortcutting Chris's recent posts, but I know in the past that Chris has said that if a kid was about to run in front of a car, he would grab the kid. (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) What if I convince enough people that slavery is wonderful? Should we encat a law authorizing slavery? Or, a little less extreme than the above example, what if I convince enough people that men wearing skirts is wonderful? The point I'm (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Wow! A great day of debate!
|
|
What's really surprising is that o-t.d tops the # posts in last 24 hour list right now, even beating out .space. Those naysayers who sprout up every once in a while questioning the existence of o-t.d... this day shows a pretty valid reason ;) Dave K (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) We're catering to the sensibilities of the local culture and the laws they enact. If enough people in one society decide public sex acts should be illegal then they should be free to create laws to that effect. If you can convince enough (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote: <snip> (...) You leave my Canadian teets alone! <snip> (...) Dave K (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
(...) Hey, don't get all reasonable on me now! I can cut through my verbosity and sum it up this way: 1. I dispute the assertion that verbal instruction is generally sufficient to steer a recalcitrant child away from ultimately self-damaging (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Wow! A great day of debate!
|
|
I just thought I'd mention that. An absolute plethora of good posts, replies and followups, with relatively no 'offense' ('xept by me, but that was yesterday ;) ) Chris is actually swaying me to his slant of child rearing, and the skin thing just (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
Dave, I'm thinking that you are nit-picking by way of purposely failing to read between the lines. If I'm wrong, then I must have communicated rather poorly. If you take a minute to evaluate my notes and your response, and then think that your (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
(...) With respect, it is seldom the case that "simply asking" will result in getting one's way. Why don't you ask your boss to double your salary and increase your benefits? Will you get your way? I grant you, throwing a tantrum probably won't (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) The example you gave above regarding woman being cover is flawed. The woman in that society choose to cover up. We might not see it as choice since Islamic law dictates it, but think of it from their perspective. They were brought up in a (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
(...) One can produce a conditioned response if that is what you mean. I'm not sure the horse (or cat) has understood much else? (...) I, and many others, manage by doing neither. How do you explain that? My kids understand they will not benefit (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
I have read some real nutters along these lines. (...) Yeah, some people think that this sexualization of children bunk starts here. (...) Sadly, some do. It makes light of respectful modesty or somesuch. My wife got into a conversation once with (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) I'll go with RAH's answer "because it scares the horses"... Other than that, no problem. (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
> But it's not neccessary. The last time I advocated something like this here, (...) desire (...) not (...) behavior (we (...) our (...) I was there also. I was impressed with the visible results of your parenting. I had one eye opening experience (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) We tend (...) Hmm, always? Does that mean that breastfeeding is sex? Hmm, I guess there are some prudes in the world that would like to prevent kids from breastfeeding. Certainly there are those who think it's wrong to do so in public. Of (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
"John" <John@TCLTC.org> wrote in message news:HsKsoz.1qu3@lugnet.com... snipped religion (...) citizens (...) frequent (...) the (...) for the (...) we just (...) Only (...) around (...) would (...) and (...) guess (...) what (...) be (...) to (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Oldest constitution still in opperation in the world used to justify same sex marriage
|
|
(...) Yaay. (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
|
(...) Why Dave? Didn't you agree before that if no one was being harmed, the laws should not interfere? How would it harm you to happen upon a couple (or more, gasp!) having leisure sex in a park near your house? Chris (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Corporal punishment (was rah rah, canada!
|
|
(...) Honestly considering tantrums is a somewhat humbling experience for parents. You can pretty explicitly track the cause of the tantrum to failure to act on the part of the parents. I've been there and done that. It's been my fault. It might be (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
