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 / *26406 (-10)
  Whew! That's a relief
 
We're all safe at (URL) last:> "The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved." Funny. The way I hear it, we're all in constant and permanent danger of being killed by terrorists at every single moment. (...) (20 years ago, 10-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Victories for smokefree ballot initiatives
 
(...) Just thought of this one: I think your basis for saying that these establishments should ban smoking is for the employees, not the customers. Basically that if the employees were, say, robots, that it would be ok to have bars that allowed (...) (20 years ago, 10-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Victories for smokefree ballot initiatives
 
(...) They're open to the public. We aren't talking about esatblishments that close their doors to people walking in. Nontheless, I don't sense we can agree on this issue, as we take a fundamentally different approach towards individual rights. (...) (20 years ago, 10-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Victories for smokefree ballot initiatives
 
(...) Where? You have no right to breathe ANY air (clean OR dirty) when on my property, unless I grant it. And conversely I have no right to emit smoke on your property, unless you grant it. Therefore when you're on my property, you will breathe the (...) (20 years ago, 10-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Victories for smokefree ballot initiatives
 
(...) The right to breathe clean air is inherently superior to the right to subject others to the byproduct of your pleasure. -Tim (20 years ago, 10-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Victories for smokefree ballot initiatives
 
(...) Even if it violates people's rights? (20 years ago, 10-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Victories for smokefree ballot initiatives
 
(...) I await the day when the concept of smoking is only remembered in the history books. Not likely to happen in my lifetime, though. In the mean time, whatever I can do to clear the air, making it safer for me and others, I'll do. -Tim (20 years ago, 10-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  IN Transportation Finance Authority to bail out already bankrupt ATA
 
(URL) that the IN TFA is not even supposed to be making loans so they engaged in chicanery to get it done. How is this appropriate? Government should not be favoring one business entity over another. Let bankruptcy function as it is supposed to. (20 years ago, 9-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  (US) Social Security Reform
 
From Cato: ' Social Security is likely to be a major issue in a second Bush term. "President Bush has shown that he is willing to expend his political capital in pursuit of a higher goal," said Michael Tanner, director of Cato's Project on Social (...) (20 years ago, 8-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Victories for smokefree ballot initiatives
 
(...) Kind of a tricky line to walk. I mean, getting a job as a stunt man you're subjected to physical danger and harm. Working as a stripper will almost guarantee what (in other industries) would easily be construed as sexual harassment from (...) (20 years ago, 8-Nov-04, 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