 | | Clark County, Ohio
|
|
I'm not sure I'd like to be on the receiving end of (URL) this>. Scott A (20 years ago, 13-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Religious Freedom Claim Taken Too Far?
|
|
(...) Actually, the doctor-to-pharmacy direct link hadn't occurred to me. My family doctor usually still gives us a script and we take it to the pharmacist, though she sometimes calls in the prescription directly, with our permission. That would (...) (20 years ago, 13-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Religious Freedom Claim Taken Too Far?
|
|
(...) From a libertarian perspective, I'll grant the pharmacist the right to discriminate. What I don't grant him the right to do though is interfere. Refusing to fill a prescription is discrimination. Refusal to forward the prescription to someone (...) (20 years ago, 13-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It didn't have to be this way....
|
|
(...) …a despot who was explicitly supported by the West. (...) Some of the world's problems do lie at the feet of the "West". (...) I understand your point. However, we should not make the mistake of believing that those who violently oppose the (...) (20 years ago, 13-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
|
(...) True tolerance entails the recognition that one's own views are not inherently or absolutely correct, but are instead correct for oneself, and perhaps very strongly held. Attendant upon this is the realization that other people's views might (...) (20 years ago, 13-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Religious Freedom Claim Taken Too Far?
|
|
(...) Well, right now we *nominally* live under the laws of America--if the Spawn of Satan is re-appointed in November, then we'll see what happens to those laws. Anyway, I completely agree with the meat of your post. The guy's welcome to believe (...) (20 years ago, 13-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Help me with the math
|
|
(...) More (URL) mass graves> that shouldn't be confused with justification for Dubya's deliberately illegal and voluntary oil war. Dave! (20 years ago, 13-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lap-dogs (was: It didn't have to be this way....)
|
|
(...) Hmmmmm. Maybe. (...) Hmmmm not sure. I thought most of the leader-types were from Adelaide but I may be mistaken. And even though they say they will argue each bill on it's merits, one has to wonder, given their election deal with Johnny. (...) (20 years ago, 13-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lap-dogs (was: It didn't have to be this way....)
|
|
(...) Don't know about that. I have had the same experience in places where one ought to have found a large number of supporters. One is drawn towards the conclusion that many folks made the choice to vote liberal but are not prepared to fess up in (...) (20 years ago, 13-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Religious Freedom Claim Taken Too Far?
|
|
(...) Seems like a no-brainer to me. That guy should lose his license. What's next: doctors refusing to provide medication because it violates some principle of faith healing? Newsflash: In this country we live under the Laws of the United States of (...) (20 years ago, 13-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lap-dogs (was: It didn't have to be this way....)
|
|
(...) LOL it doesn't really depress me, but it does surprise me. I mean, everyone I've spoken to since the election has said "so who the heck voted Liberal??". But I guess that's probably just a case of me associating with people that share similar (...) (20 years ago, 13-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Religious Freedom Claim Taken Too Far?
|
|
Here's an interesting one: (URL) pharmacist refused to fill a contraceptive prescription for religious reasons. That might be ok, except, he also refused to transfer the prescription to another pharmacy. Now he's claiming he shouldn't be punished. (...) (20 years ago, 12-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
|
(...) There is a technically accurate term for describing a male heterosexual who has kids--a term that isn't used in 'polite company' (though appears in many rap songs and movies that love to use profanity...)--I don't think Lee would like people (...) (20 years ago, 12-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
|
(...) Sure it is. And so is "bastard" and "moron" - but these terms have been deemed offensive, and so using them, even if accurate to do so, is considered offensive and rude. I should also point that 'sodomite' is not actually accurate, because it (...) (20 years ago, 12-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: It didn't have to be this way....
|
|
(...) Mmmmm. I think I have remarked upon same here before, and can only agree completely. But as to it not having to be this way, I am not so sure. There would seem to be few examples of freedom delivered from without that were any more successful. (...) (20 years ago, 12-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
|
(...) Bad idea. If you're going to post debate material in a non-debate group learn better. Quickly. (...) This is off-topic because: A. It's a continuation of your trolling on the subject of homosexuality, which is essentially debate material. B. (...) (20 years ago, 12-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is lgbt dead in the water?
|
|
(...) Hi Soren, I didn't think to file this under there - I just reply to a message and let the screen fill in whatever groups the previous poster used. Also, why would you say this is off-topic? I replied to someone who posted this reply to me in (...) (20 years ago, 12-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More fodder, similar topic(was: Re: Driver humiliated)
|
|
(...) Hmm, it sounds like the tried to prevent the person from doing harm. How much should they try? Do they have to risk death themselves? Criminalizing failure to prevent another from committing a crime is a pretty dangerous slope to perch on. (...) (20 years ago, 12-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It didn't have to be this way....
|
|
(...) (URL) read. One thought I have though... Would the situation truly be any better if Sadam had got out of power any other way? Part of what is happening is the power vacuum that results from elimination of a despot. The rest of the problem is (...) (20 years ago, 12-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament: A Family Stoned and a City Massacred
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote: (snip interesting foot-story) (...) But if we accept that human DNA is constantly changing, it stands to reason that any ideals encoded therein would be constantly changing too. (...) LOL I think that (...) (20 years ago, 9-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament: A Family Stoned and a City Massacred
|
|
(...) I'd like God a whole lot better if he'd just bother to show up once and awhile instead of being such a deadbeat dad... Spencer (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament: A Family Stoned and a City Massacred
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote: <snip> (...) So I'm trying to get to sleep last night--tossing and turning around, and I find myself thinking about my foot. My foot, at that moment, was 'peeking out' from under the sheets and hanging (...) (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament: A Family Stoned and a City Massacred
|
|
(...) Hi Anthony: Thanks for taking the time to reply. Even if you choose not to respond after this post, I hope you'll read my response, if only to get a sense of where I'm coming from. (...) I must confess that I'm not comfortable with at least (...) (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament: A Family Stoned and a City Massacred
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote: SNIP (...) SNIP (...) Sorry for bringing up an old thread, and for beating a dead horse. It's not in my nature to evangelize, but the Catholic in me has been bothered by these two statements. I've been (...) (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) Dave, I can give you another data point about MRIs, but everyone else has pretty much covered it that if you need it immediately, you will get it, otherwise, you'll have a long wait. I was getting something checked out and the neurologist (...) (20 years ago, 8-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) Well, for millennia we've lived under a system that allocates resources to the economically or militarily powerful, so naturally there's a huge inequity re: who "owns" the resources. If we can fix that inequity, then we can address the others. (...) (20 years ago, 7-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) Might the logical conclusion instead be that there should be no money at all, without niggling about public vs. private? I don't suggest that I have a fully fleshed-out alternative to offer, but it seems clear that the consensual hallucination (...) (20 years ago, 7-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) Only insofar as THEY derived a benefit... if what they paid in taxes covered the education services they received, then no... in fact one could argue that I ought to get a credit in my accounting if what they paid was more. But this could (...) (20 years ago, 7-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | It didn't have to be this way....
|
|
(URL) (20 years ago, 7-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | More fodder, similar topic(was: Re: Driver humiliated)
|
|
(...) I ran into this BBC article this evening: (URL) it right to hold people responsible for not stopping someone drunk from getting behind the wheel? Five years prison each for this? I really could go either way. Again, I'm not very up on modern (...) (20 years ago, 7-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) Have you thought through to the logical conclusion of the path you're following? The logical conclusion is that there should be no private money at all. But then that raises an interesting question: Who decides what is reasonable to spend (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) Ok, here's a question on this one. If we truly believe that society owes everyone healthcare, do we include global society? Do we owe the billions of people in India and China the same standard of healthcare that is being demanded for (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) But underlying technology is only one aspect. If any of the designers (at MS, Intel, or wherever) went to a public school or received a government grant for college or for subsequent research, then you are benefitting from public money. I (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) I could argue the point that in fact I (and my parents) paid more into the system than we have benefited from it, and I could do so for every example you cite, I think, if I chose to do so. (as a sketch, for the first one, the computer's (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) Sure! Here's one example, but there are many: The computer you're using is descended from publicly funded technology for which you have not paid but from which you are reaping the benefit; this is income redistribution that favors you. The (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) How so? Can you elaborate? What routine things do I expect others to pay for on my behalf? I buy my own stuff. (...) Or the ability of his insurance to pay? (...) You wouldn't hold that person responsible for those costs to the maximum extent (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) What follows is all plowed ground... The above presents a false dichotomy in my view. It suggests that either those that are unlucky suffer, or else government has to transfer income (fundamentally, at the point of a gun, since taxation is not (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) Maybe the nature of "routine things" is the issue. Is a small but stitch-worthy laceration routine? How about a broken leg? Anyway, we *all* require that someone else pay for things that we consider routine, present company included. Why (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
Yes, it is true that there are waits for non-critical exams and procedures. However, if it is a more serious case, the wait is usually less than a week. I have a neighbour that injured his knee back at the end of June. Several weeks of physiotherapy (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A question for my Canadian pals
|
|
(...) I'd say our system is more "socalist" than "communist." Oddly enough, I had an MRI last night (I hurt my arm playing tennis, but an insane specialist wants to make sure I didn't have a stroke. What!?!?). I had one last week, too and I have (...) (20 years ago, 6-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
