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 / *24356 (-10)
  Re: Gay Marriage
 
(...) You are deliberately misinterpreting the Bill of Rights. Of course that Amendment had nothing to do with the concept of marriage. (...) The definition of marriage is the union of one man and one women. NO gay person is excluded from entering (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Gay Marriage
 
(...) Oh my god, Larry. That was beautiful. Perhaps the single best post I've read in OTD ever. -lenny (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
 
(...) Sure, IRL, but I was speaking theoretically, as I believe were the FF. Merely because someone is able to oppress me and take away my rights doesn't justify it. (...) That is precisely why I claim they are divinely-endowed, so that no one has (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Back to the Real Wasteland of the mind
 
(...) No bet unless you're offering mighty attractive odds (say "lottery" odds of 1:1M or better... say, my single 1x1 red brick with eye printed on it against your entire collection). Clinton's blamable for bin Laden still being out there, he had (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Gay Marriage
 
(...) I'll cite the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution. You even know the amendment... it's the one that discusses the right of citizens to associate (or not) as they choose. Then I'll cite contract law in general. People can enter into (or not (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
 
(...) All I am asking is upon what do you believe our society is based. If you think it is a myriad of things, fine. What are they? (...) Upon what exactly do you base your assertion? (...) What I mean is that you are asserting things for which you (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: 9/11 Panel: No Evidence Connecting Iraq to Al Qaeda
 
(...) You might find this (URL) site> amusing, in its discussions of why and how US involvement in WWI, WWII and WWIII was orchestrated. I had a learned friend of mine ernestly suggesting that the US administration had had a plan to join in WWII (...) (20 years ago, 18-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
 
(...) Um, these rights are already very easy to take away. George W. Bush has, for example, taken them away from a whole bunch of people, both as Governor and as President, both here and abroad. Is Dubya so powerful that he can supplant the Will of (...) (20 years ago, 17-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Back to the Real Wasteland of the mind
 
(...) Holy crap, I just found (URL) It's viewable for free, but registration will apparently be required before long. Here's the salient bit: The unidentified detainee, believed to be a leader of the outlawed Ansar al Islam group, was held without (...) (20 years ago, 17-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: 9/11 Panel: No Evidence Connecting Iraq to Al Qaeda
 
(...) I think I know why. The stakes are so much higher now that it is too horrifying to accept. Most people I know, as far as I can figure, simply refuse to believe that President Bush was lying to us the whole time to gain approval to pursue his (...) (20 years ago, 17-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR