 | | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Absolute Morality boils down to how we treat each other. This is directly related to issues of respect and responsibility. A breakdown on either side of the equation (you verses me) creates societal rifts. (...) Eeeeuuu. Both are equally (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) But don't you see-- there is no definitive line! The line is where ever the sensibilities of a society is at any given point in time. Right now the current sensibilities of our society are being offended by certain individuals and society is (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Interesting (and, I note, consistent with your previously stated views). I wonder if they might have considered relative firepower/destructive potential if they'd known what would eventually be man-portable. That's wonder-if question, as (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) I'd refer you to the Federalist Papers for something a bit more authoriative, but my guess would be no, their cutoff seemed to be "man portable" rather than "portable if you have a whole team of horses". Before you ask, that DOES rule out (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) That's key, IMO. If we're all so fond of Absolute Morality, why are our Duly Elected Representatives so reluctant to address these society-damning issues in absolutely clear terms? Especially if, as we're endlessly told by Dobson, Falwell, and (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) I know we've all discussed this before, and I confess that I don't have a clear concept of what's appropriate for whom to possess, but I have I have question about the history of this interpretation. How did the founding fathers feel about (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) More to the point is the guys doing the legislation want to lock things down but doin't know where that line is--"banning 'some' Shakespeare"--which parts? Banning some cheerleader moves--which moves. So it's not that people aren't accepting (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) Everyone wants freedom, but no one is willing to take responsibility for their actions, and so the GP is forced to control irresponsible people's behavior through their representatives, their elected government officials. We live in a free (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) You snipped the more important stuff I think. (...) Why aren't you sure???? I said it here before, wasn't kidding then, wasn't this time either. (...) To each his own. I won't say that there might be wags on this side of the line saying the (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | From the "they can't be serious" department
|
|
Al Gore to get a lifetime achievement award: (URL) "inventing the internet"? not quite, but almost... (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lindsay Frederick Braun wrote: <snip> (...) I hope the 'better minds' will prevail in Texas, where legislation is being passed in which cheerleaders aren't allowed to 'shake their booty' anymore-- (URL) both these (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snip> (...) The thing is I'm not sure if you're serious or not, but that's irrelevant--I know 'Mericans that are serious about that statement and for that, I thank God every day that I'm Canadian. (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
(...) Richard is right as far as he goes, where he falls down is in his prescription for how to change countries to be free... (...) You mean like the US??? (...) You mean like Dubya ??? (...) I agree! (...) That too. I think the second admendment (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Parsons wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> My take is simply this: nukes cannot be trusted to countries under the leadership of despots, dictators, and other illegitate rulers. Democracy is the key-- when people are free (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The case for compensation
|
|
(...) Well SH did say Q8 was part of Iraq. ;) Scott A (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Who the devil are we to lecture on 'nucular' non-proliferation? (careful, long rant)
|
|
I see the (URL) talks got off to a happy start, demanding that the Iranians and North Koreans give up or do differently their nuclear programmes for peaceful power generation/weapons research/weapons production (as the case may be). Even as a (...) (19 years ago, 5-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The case for compensation
|
|
(...) Wow! They invaded their own country???? Good way to get that WMD funding approved I guess... ROSCO (19 years ago, 4-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The case for compensation
|
|
(...) Hmm. In that case, perhaps they could have called it "Agent Red White and Blue" rather than the rather un-Patriotic (spit) Agent Orange. (...) I’m inspired by your cowboy president… I love shooting from the hip. ;) Scott A (19 years ago, 2-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ya wanna talk about legislating morality?
|
|
(...) "Think of the morality of our women/children/society/etc" has been the cry behind censorship since time immemorial. It's always in the name of "protection." TJ had it right; those who would sacrifice liberty for some small measure of security (...) (19 years ago, 4-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Priority
|
|
So the war (URL) was a fabrication>, but who cares? At least the Runaway Bride is home safe and sound. Dave! (19 years ago, 3-May-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
